The explosive rise of online streaming video services like Netflix, Hulu and YouTube has dramatically altered the consumer experience for video content unlike anything seen since the advent of color television. And while gallons of ink have been spilled analyzing streamers’ threat to the cable TV business, streaming has also massively disrupted local television broadcasters’ economics — both in terms of advertising revenue and fees for retransmission rights. 

Tough circumstances have caused some parties to seek refuge via government protections at the Federal Communications Commission, arguing Internet streamers should be captured within the agency’s grips akin to old-school cable operators, which would improperly give broadcasters exponentially more leverage in content and carriage negotiations. Aside from being an absolutely horrible policy decision, the FCC has no authority to do so. Commissioners should flatly reject calls to (re)explore such a misguided direction. 

Broadcasters Must Adjust to Changes

As a long-time defender of local television broadcasters, I respect the valuable contributions that individual stations and their network partners bring to viewers and their respective communities.  But the current market realities cannot be ignored: technological advances and consumer viewing patterns have changed dramatically. eMarketer estimates that almost 36% of families have cut the traditional cable video cord, choosing to get programming through the internet and other means. And Barron’s estimates that internet streaming time already has surpassed hours spent watching cable or local broadcast stations. Broadcasters, like all industries challenged by progress, will need to alter their practices and counter competitors in the market.  

The best response from affected parties and government agencies would be to seek to completely deregulate almost every aspect of local broadcasting. Rather than continuing as a regulatory piñata, broadcasters should push regulators vehemently to eliminate every burden in which they are treated differently than their streaming counterparts. Media ownership limits on the national or local level? Expensive record keeping and licensing reviews? There is no logical defense in today’s radically remade video marketplace to maintain regulations designed for a 1970s industry. 

Those seeking to pursue the regulatory state as local broadcasting’s savior, rather than the nemesis it can be, are fundamentally missing or intentionally ignoring the fact that the market is already working. This is particularly relevant for those demanding the government interfere in the content negotiations between Internet streamers and television networks. Market forces and private-sector negotiations are already doing just fine on their own: the networks (and their programming partnerships) who hold rights to certain programming get to determine how the content is sold or carried by Internet streamers. If local broadcasters are being neglected or ignored in these negotiations, they’re free to work out those disagreements via their affiliate contracts with the networks. The commission inserting new rules and regulations would create new rights where none exist today.

To the extent that internet streamers seek to carry the entirety of a local broadcaster’s signal, broadcasters are free to negotiate that right to render the proper price point and conditions. But they must be aware that what they are selling can be mostly replicated by other broadcasters or the networks themselves.  There is no market scarcity, much less market exclusivity, in an always-on video world of thousands upon thousands of programming options. 

Congress’s Key Role

Equally important, Congress hasn’t authorized the FCC to insert itself into these negotiations.  The definitions and language Congress wrote into current statutory provisions do not extend to internet streamers. 

While my good friend and former FCC commissioner Rob McDowell recently argued that this omission is a loophole or quirk in the regulations, that is just not accurate. When serving at the commission, I extensively reviewed the previous proceeding’s record and took all the meetings in which these exact jurisdictional issues — a specialty of mine — were explored. The argument is without merit, no matter whatever legal gymnastics lawyers seek to pursue.  Simply put, the commission is precluded from acting without subsequent authority granted by Congress.    

Reopening a dead proceeding — even if the FCC is just examining if it has authority to act — breathes a hint of hope that the government might extend its fishing expedition, eventually to be rejected by the courts.  By that time, however, the commission’s unlawful overreach would already be distorting the video marketplace by generating unfair leverage in private negotiations.      

Internet streaming is a wonder for consumers, despite how troublesome it may be for the traditional industry participants. The government, in this case the FCC, should avoid interfering in a working market and reject calls to examine its nonexistent authority to intervene. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, government is not the solution to the problem; government would become the problem.     

Any experienced telecom practitioner can share the basic truth that from time to time the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) simply makes mistakes and occasionally even skirts outside the bounds of its legal authority. While generally well-meaning, the agency is not infallible and it can be overly aggressive to serve select agendas. 

To rectify this, there is a cherished right and longstanding practice that any party that has standing can challenge the commission to reconsider an action or petition the court to set aside a particular decision.  Sometimes these challenges have strong arguments and win; often, they do not. 

But what should concern everyone is when the FCC intentionally skews the process so much that objecting parties are procedurally prohibited from seeking any reasonable form of recourse.  A few weeks ago, the commission did just this.  By sidestepping the traditional determinative process, the agency’s staff, under newly found delegated authority, attempted to silently kill off the transfer of broadcast licenses between Tegna and Standard General. In essence, the highly-discredited and objectional procedure — known in FCC parlance as a Hearing Designation Order — attempts to send the application off on a slow boat to nowhere. Intentionally, this blatant process abuse likely will force parties to abandon their transaction without due process. If the commissioners themselves do not overturn this, which I have argued multiple times to allow delegated items to be brought before the full commission for a vote, I hope the court system will drop the red flag to restore fairness and justice.   

To understand the outrageousness of the HDO, it is important to consider the timing of its adoption.  While the commission moves glacially slow on so many matters, the transfer of licenses for broadcast television and radio stations tends to generate the strictest scrutiny and the longest delays. Applications involving media licenses can be delayed, bumping up against or exceeding the commission’s “aspirational” merger shot clock of 180 days. In the case of Tegna, the timeline has already stretched almost a full year. After multiple rounds of comment requests, the record was very complete, and it was essentially ready for a final decision. At the very last minute, the agency mic-drops the HDO under the guise of finding facts on select issues. 

Consider that if the agency wanted to explore the designated issues, it had almost an entire year to do so.  It previously publicly sought comment on applicants’ concessions for the very issues the HDO is supposedly exploring.  Further, knowing how critical timing was to applicants, it could have set a narrow but definitive window for the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to conduct her work.  Yet, it did neither. 

Having served at the commission for many years and having been involved in prior HDOs, the justification provided in this case is really fiction. It is common knowledge within the FCC and its  legal bar that the HDO process is a longstanding, bipartisan tool to kill transactions via the back door. It was that way under the commission of chairman Tom Wheeler, when it threatened to use it in the Comcast-Time Warner Cable application, and the same under the Ajit Pai commission’s use in the Sinclair Broadcast Group-Tribune Media proposed transaction.  The agency has an undefeated record of successfully executing HDOs, and in some cases merely suggesting its use to parties, to end mergers.  I refer to this process as a proverbial black hole as no entity ever escapes its clutches. To pretend an HDO in this instance is otherwise requires an immeasurable suspension of disbelief.

Critics of the merger may attack my views, suggesting I give no credence to the merits of their claims.  The truth is that the substance is given short shrift by the agency when it adopted the HDO. Had the commission used a legitimate process, it could have given the applicants direction to resolve or even adopt opponents’ positions with appropriate retransmission consent firewalls and exorbitant station budgets. Certainly, it’s not hard to craft strengthened concessions to sufficiently ameliorate the concerns raised, despite any personal objections I might have. And the agency could have set a time deadline for the hearing of 30 or 60 days, which could have worked for the applicants and their financiers. But the agency went silent, avoiding any communications over how to fix any perceived deficiencies in the application, and moved to launch an ALJ review without time limits.

FCC process reform has been a multidecade project for me, becoming a career priority, because I firmly believe that the American people expect government officials to be fair — in processes used and decisions made. Adoption of the HDO in the Tegna transaction is anything but.  Hopefully, this can be remedied before it’s too late, and certainly before the next time it is contemplated.   

These days, technology-advanced farms are just as reliant on broadband connectivity as any other modern business. Sensors, automation, autonomous vehicles and other “precision agriculture” tools bring greater efficiencies and productivity to many American farmers, who literally help feed the entire world. The Farm Bureau projects that more widespread adoption of these broadband-enabled best practices could boost U.S. agricultural productivity by $65 billion per year. 

That’s a big reason why Congress is investing in a multitude of federal programs to ensure internet access is available to all corners of our nation, especially households, businesses and farms in rural communities.

One of those initiatives — the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural eConnectivity Program, or ReConnect — is due for some key improvements as Congress considers the upcoming Farm Bill. The adoption of targeted reforms Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) have proposed in the Rural Internet Improvement Act of 2023 would be a smart and thoughtful place to start. 

The ReConnect program has been a bit of an anomaly since its 2018 inception. Initially funded as a one-time pilot project, the program has been extended annually without traditional guardrails or oversight. That has generated some inconsistencies, coordination difficulties and troubling outcomes. For instance, the program’s grant approval process, which fluctuates year to year, functions completely outside the Administrative Procedure Act, preventing interested parties from even commenting on the decision making. And those decisions deserve review. 

Improving ReConnect, however, must begin with making sure its funding reaches the rural communities that truly need it.  Just about everyone agrees that scarce federal funds must go to ensuring everyone has internet coverage, rather than subsidizing “overbuilds” in areas where fast connectivity already exists.  Every dollar spent overbuilding current networks fails to help needier rural communities gain modern digital infrastructure. 

Yet the overbuilding threshold for ReConnect has at times been lowered from 90% of households without internet in the area (arguably still objectionable) to 50% of households without Internet, which means half of the project would overbuild existing broadband. Why? No sound reasons were provided when it was last modified as part of the infrastructure spending bill. Thankfully, the Rural Internet Improvement Act restores the 90% target and focuses on building networks capable of commonly accepted broadband speeds. If this simple but fundamental correction can’t be made, efforts to codify a flawed ReConnect should be considered a non-starter. 

Likewise, the bill precludes funding for areas already covered by other federal broadband efforts and boosts the provider challenge process. For years, policymakers have demanded coordination from the differing federal broadband programs.  Why in the world should USDA fund broadband buildouts in areas that have already secured Federal Communications Commission, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, Treasury Department or other federal funds for the same purpose?  Even the most ardent supporter of ReConnect should blush at the notion of double-dipping. 

Equal Opportunities

Additionally, the Rural Internet Improvement Act moves the program onto more solid ground so all qualified participants can apply and have an equal chance to win grants based on objective criteria. So far, whole broadband industry segments that have met of all the program’s qualifications haven’t won a single dime. The probability of this happening is about the same statistically as a cat successfully driving a tractor. 

A fair ReConnect process does not undercut the likelihood of telephone and electric co-ops, which have been primary beneficiaries of the current structure, from winning where they are the most qualified and prepared to bring service. Policymakers certainly don’t need to tilt the process in co-ops’ favor from the outset. In fact, my long history with telephone co-ops suggests that they are exceptionally capable and attune to rural community needs to do quite well in an impartial application process. This is likely why NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association, an advocate for telephone cooperatives, has been favorable towards the bill, as have others. 

In a perfect world, there shouldn’t be a need to maintain a separate broadband grant program within the Department of Agriculture. For various reasons, policymakers have determined that ReConnect should remain, and I won’t quibble with that decision here. 

But if ReConnect is to continue, then we should expect that it be run fairly and efficiently, target those rural citizens in need, not overbuild areas where existing private sector providers offer service of sufficient quality, and prevent duplicative subsidies for broadband builds already being funded by other federal agencies. Solidifying and codifying these principles is exactly why the Rural Internet Improvement Act would bring credibility and sustainability to any broadband provisions continued in the eventual 2023 Farm Bill. ■

Former FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly is joining The Media Institute as a senior fellow starting April 1.

He will also be a member of the institute's First Amendment Advisory Council. The second post is particularly appropriate since O'Rielly's defense of the First Amendment, in a speech to the Institute, arguably cost him his job on the commission.

Also Read: The O'Rielly Factor

O'Rielly was re-nominated by President Trump for an extended (five-year) hitch but that nomination was withdrawn after a speech to The Media Institute in which O'Rielly questioned the President's efforts to regulate speech on social media platforms.

Also Read: O'Rielly Returns to Hill to Talk Broadband

In that speech, O'Rielly talked about ‘purveyors of First Amendment gibberish … demeaning the values of the Constitution.’ He later told Multichannel News that was not meant to target any one person or group, but instead it was about "highlighting the importance of the First Amendment, which is paramount to me, and how it can’t be ignored whether other statutory provisions come or go."

O’Rielly is already a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Center for the Economics of the Internet and has hung out his own consulting shingle, MPORielly Consulting, LLC.

“Michael O’Rielly shares the same values we hold dear: sound communications policy, a competitive media industry, and a strong First Amendment,” said Institute president Richard Kaplar in a statement.

"Hopefully, my record shows that I welcome the opportunity, even when not easy or popular, to push back against anyone seeking to denigrate, malign, or infringe upon our cherished rights preserved by the U.S. Constitution," said O'Rielly.

Former commissioner Michael O'Rielly is back on the FCC broadband buildout and investment stage, only this time as a witness on the topic at a Hill hearing this week.

Also Read: The O'Rielly Factor

Senate Commerce Committee chair Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) is holding a hearing March 17 about the spending, rather than the wearing, of the green.

The hearing is focused on what progress has been made through a variety of subsidy programs offering up billions of dollars to expand connectivity in rural and underserved communities. "Witnesses will have the opportunity to discuss the effectiveness of these programs in delivering connectivity to unserved and underserved Americans throughout the country," Cantwell's office said. 

The programs include the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund, NTIA grant programs and the billions of dollars in new money Congress has allocated for E-rate and other subsidy programs.

Also Read: LIFT Act Would Allocate $100 Billion for Universal Broadband

In addition to O'Rielly, witnesses for the hearing, “Recent Federal Actions to Expand Broadband: Are We Making Progress?", include Dr. Christopher Ali, associate professor, Department of Media Studies, University of Virginia; Justin Forde, senior director, government relations, Midco; and Jon Wilkins, partner, Quadra Partners. 

O'Rielly has long been critical of the potential of overbuilding existing privately-funded broadband in government efforts to speed universal broadband. "I realize the incredible need to get the dollars out the door to help stimulate the economy," he told the magazine shortly before he left the commission and as Congress was approving billions of new broadband money in the CARES Act, "but that is not how you should do telecom policy, especially when you are going to crush existing providers in the marketplace."

"Overbuilding itself is not problematic," he said, "it’s subsidized overbuilding using CARES Act funding or any government funding. There will likely be more stimulus money and infrastructure money and it has to be very clear how the dollars will be spent."

Look for O'Rielly to provide similar words of caution as Democrats talk about putting as much as $100 billion into subsidizing universal broadband. 

Commissioner Michael O’Rielly is exiting the Federal Communications Commission after seven years on the panel and 27 years in public service. He was a Capitol Hill staffer before getting the post. 

O’Rielly said he will be returning to the private sector, but has not yet firmed up plans as, when he conducted this exit interview, he was still working on agency business in preparation for the Dec. 10 public meeting.

The Republican was an ally of chairman Ajit Pai’s deregulation efforts, though in some cases would have gone even further. He spoke to B+C senior content producer, Washington, John Eggerton about his time at the commission and the issues about which he remains passionate.

Also Read: Republican Nathan Simington Confirmed to FCC Seat

B+C: In a speech to the Media Institute you said, ‘Massive changes are needed if we’re going to avoid sending legacy providers the way of the woolly mammoth.’ 

Michael O’Rielly: There is a very competitive, vibrant, over-the-top offering that is already there for consumers and that will be expanding in the future. That puts incredible pressure on legacy providers. Some of them are migrating their own services, so they are competing with themselves and that requires the FCC to, for one, better define the marketplace and competitors so we can better regulate as necessary. That means eliminating a number of burdens that no longer make any sense. We have barely scratched the surface with our media-modernization efforts. 

B+C: The FCC has never acted on requests to classify over-the-top as a multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD). Should the FCC treat them both the same, and should that be regulating OTT or deregulating traditional video? 

MO: I do have some deep questions about the authority of the FCC to do so, but I don’t think that is the right path to go. We should be providing relief to legacy providers rather than trying to capture over-the-top providers. Doing so is not going to make it better for consumers. We ought to instead give legacy providers a fighting chance.

B+C: Any advice on how the government can prevent COVID-19 broadband money from subsidizing overbuilds? 

MO: I think Congress has done a fairly decent job of trying to put some statutory obligations to prevent overbuilding, though I would have gone further. Overbuilding itself is not problematic — it’s subsidized overbuilding using CARES Act funding or any government funding. There will likely be more stimulus money and infrastructure money and it has to be very clear how the dollars will be spent.

I realize the incredible need to get the dollars out the door to help stimulate the economy, but that is not how you should do telecom policy, especially when you are going to crush existing providers in the marketplace.

B+C:  What decision that you have been involved with do you think will have the most lasting impact? 

MO: I am very proud of the children’s television reforms. They aren’t as far as I would have liked them to go, but nobody sued and it provided the type of relief that is necessary. 

B+C: In that Media Institute speech, you talked about ‘purveyors of First Amendment gibberish … demeaning the values of the Constitution.’ Who were you talking about and to whom were you directing that? 

MO: That was about a larger conversation about regulating the edge. I don’t want to relive that speech, but it wasn’t targeted at any one person or one group or any segment. It was about highlighting the importance of the First Amendment, which is paramount to me, and how it can’t be ignored whether other statutory provisions come or go.

The First Amendment will live on regardless of what Congress does or doesn’t do on the [Section 230 internet] liability issue. Those people who were trying to say, ‘Oh, I am consistent with the First Amendment’ or ‘I really believe in the First Amendment. I just want to try and stick it to these groups for whatever reason,’ I just disagreed with that.

B+C: You have issues with the FCC’s authority to do something about Section 230, right? 

MO: Yes, I have not seen any more clarity than we previously had. I don’t know how the legal structure was determined by the legal counsel to the chairman, and the chairman saying we do have authority. [The Trump Administration petitioned the FCC to regulate the edge via Section 230.] I would have to analyze it more closely, but I was skeptical before and I think I am still skeptical.

B+C: If you had a do-over, is there anything you would change? 

MO: I’m not sure there is. I won’t say I got everything right but based on the information I had, I made the soundest decision I could reflecting the record and the statute. 

I wish we could have done more together and that there was a more collaborative process. I think the current structure needs a lot of work. 

I probably would have pushed for more dereg, but I have been harping on that for years and I’m not sure I could have gotten any further on it.

B+C: Any advice for your successor?  

MO: I try not to give anyone advice, but something I do say to everyone, not just my successor, but to anyone who wants to do this job is to read the items. Don’t take anyone else’s word for it. Do the homework yourself. Then you can have a thoughtful argument and make a thoughtful case.

I won’t name names, but I was annoyed when some of my colleagues in the past didn’t always read the items, so when you went to argue a particular piece of something or sentence, they didn’t know what you were talking about. That, to me, is poor. Always understand what you are fighting for.

B+C: What’s next?

MO: To be determined. I have not spent too much time thinking about it because I am still voting on items. But I will just see where the road takes me.

B+C: But I assume it will take you to the private sector? 

MO: Oh, yes. I am done with my government service. I’ve done 27 years in government. This is a moment when I think the Lord Almighty said, ‘Move on.’ I was willing to do some more time, but the powers that be said otherwise.

FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly has apparently made his official exit from the commission after seven years. 

O'Rielly's FCC twitter account was no longer active Thursday night and stakeholders were weighing in following his final meeting.

That came Thursday (Dec. 10) following the FCC's December meeting--which featured praise from his colleagues and FCC staffers--and the confirmation earlier this week of his successor, Nathan Simington. 

Also Read: Simington Confirmed to FCC Seat

O'Rielly is heading for the private sector, he told Multichannel News this week, having spent 27 years in government service, including as a top Hill staffer working on the 1996 Telecom Act.

“During his tenure at the FCC, Mike O’Rielly served with steadfast integrity, intellectual honesty and an unwavering passion for advancing policies that enable a competitive marketplace to thrive," said NCTA-The Internet & Television President Michael Powell, himself a former Republican FCC commissioner and chairman. "His determined advocacy played a critical role in Commission decisions to free up more unlicensed and mid-band spectrum and his commitment to connecting the truly unserved helped shape technology-neutral auctions for USF funding that opened participation to new providers and will result in more households being connected. Mike also forcefully advocated for the removal of outdated regulations that don’t make sense in today’s vibrant marketplace and his humility in policymaking is a model for others. We wish Mike all the best as his career moves beyond the FCC.”

“Over the years, as ACA Connects got to know Commissioner O’Rielly in his leadership position at the FCC, we developed nothing but the deepest respect for his service to the country and his dependable approach to law and regulation," said ACA Connects President Matt Polka. “To his credit, Commissioner O’Rielly was always willing to reach out and consider the point of view of independent video and broadband providers. Commissioner O’Rielly had an open-door approach that demonstrated to all stakeholders, private and public, that he examined each issue on the merits with an open mind. That’s a model for anyone in public service to follow.

Also Read: Carr Urges Simington Confirmation to Stall Democratic Agenda

“We also greatly appreciate the fact that he would set aside time to address ACA Connects members personally at our annual Washington, D.C., Summit. Candid and approachable, Commissioner O’Rielly told it like it is, and it was never a mystery about where we stood with him on the issues, win or lose..."

“For the last seven years, Commissioner O’Rielly has been a champion for smart wireless and spectrum policies,": said CTIA President Meredith Attwell Baker, herself also a former Republican FCC commissioner. "He stood up for free-market principles and competition, fought tirelessly to end 9-1-1 fee diversion and has been a dedicated public servant for more than 20 years. Thanks to his work, a vital mid-band spectrum auction is currently underway, ensuring America’s continued lead in wireless and innovation and providing a needed boost to our emerging 5G economy.”

Congratulations began to flow following the 49 to 46 Republican party line vote to confirm Nathan Simington to the FCC.

He was President Trump's pick to fill the seat being vacated by Commissioner Michael O'Rielly after Trump withdrew O'Rielly's nomination, reportedly over the President's differences with O'Rielly on regulating social media and the FCC's authority to do so.

“I congratulate Nathan on his confirmation by the U.S. Senate and look forward to welcoming him to the Commission," said FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, though it will be "hi and goodbye" because Pai is exiting next month. 

Related: Simington Confirmed to FCC

"It has been the greatest honor of my professional life to serve at the FCC, and I am confident that Nathan too will enjoy the challenges and rewards of the job," said the chairman. "Nathan was raised in a rural community, and his confirmation ensures that this important perspective will continue to be represented on the Commission for years to come as the FCC continues its work on bridging the digital divide. And with his experience at NTIA and in the private sector, Nathan is well-positioned to hit the ground running.”

That will likely not happen until after the FCC's Thursday (Dec. 10) public meeting, which features issues O'Rielly has deep knowledge about.

“I want to extend my congratulations to Nathan Simington on his confirmation tonight by the United States Senate to serve on the Federal Communications Commission," said Brendan Carr, who will be Simington's fellow Republican on the commission. "Nathan will bring a wealth of private and public sector experience to the Commission, including having served most recently as Senior Advisor in the National Telecommunications and Information Administration. Once he is sworn in, I look forward to working together with him and my other colleagues on the Commission on common sense policies that will advance the public interest.”

"I congratulate Nathan Simington on his confirmation," said Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, in a notably sparse statement. "I welcome him to the Federal Communications Commission. Serving the American people is a great honor. I look forward to working with him as we take on our nation’s most pressing digital age communications challenges."

Her brevity was matched by the other Democratic commissioner, Geoffrey Starks: "Congratulations to Nathan Simington on his confirmation to the Federal Communications Commission. The FCC’s policies are critical to our shared future and I look forward to working with him in the days ahead.”

“Nathan Simington’s confirmation will help ensure a balanced FCC and continued light-touch regulatory approach that has kept the internet free and open for all Americans,” said Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). “I look forward to working with him to advance U.S. leadership in 5G, expand access to broadband, and secure our nation’s communications networks.”

“NAB congratulates Nathan Simington on his confirmation to the Federal Communications Commission," said National Association of Broadcasters President Gordon Smith. "We look forward to working with him and his colleagues on policies that enable broadcasters to best serve their communities at a time when local broadcasters’ role to educate and inform Americans has never been more important.”

“ACA Connects congratulates Commissioner Nathan Simington on his Senate confirmation, and we look forward to working with him on the key issues at the top of the country’s communications agenda, including efforts to deliver high-performance broadband service to all Americans," said association president Matt Polka. “ACA Connects agrees with Commissioner Simington, who noted in his Senate testimony last month that we are much closer to closing the digital divide today than we were a few short years ago but we must continue to seek opportunities to improve and extend connectivity.”

“We congratulate Nathan Simington on his confirmation to the FCC," said NCTA-the Internet & Television Association President Michael Powell, himself a former FCC commissioner and chairman. "Mr. Simington joins the FCC at a time when our national commitment to connect every American to broadband is more vital than ever. We look forward to working with him and his colleagues to find creative solutions that will promote private sector investment and innovation rather than returning to obsolete regulatory models of the past that would only stifle broadband deployment.”

“USTelecom looks forward to working with Mr. Simington in the coming days to advance the urgent and bipartisan goal of accelerating broadband connectivity to all in the United States," said USTelecom President Jonathan Spalter. "The value of broadband – and the state-of-the-art networks our members invest in and build – has never been clearer, and the work of the FCC in the years ahead will have a profound impact on connectivity and America’s global digital leadership. Whatever the challenge – COVID-19, economic recovery, job creation, racial equity, healthcare, education or national security – broadband is essential to our nation’s connected future. Count on USTelecom to work with Commissioner Simington and the rest of his colleagues on the Commission to meet these challenges head on and create opportunities to finally put the digital divide in the rearview mirror.”

“We congratulate Nathan Simington on his Senate confirmation to be an FCC Commissioner," said Consumer Technology Association President Gary Shapiro. "The FCC advances policies that are essential to U.S. technology leadership–from increasing spectrum access to building infrastructure to equipment authorizations. We look forward to working with Commissioner Simington and his colleagues to continue the momentum that Chairman Pai set in motion when he assumed leadership of the FCC. 

“When Chairman Pai steps down in January, the FCC will be deadlocked," said Shapiro, a point Democrats made in opposing the Simington confirmation. "As such, we urge the commission to work together in a bipartisan way to achieve shared goals, focus on those issues that are core to the agency’s mission and remain consistent with our free-enterprise values as a nation," he said. 

“We look forward to working with Mr. Simington, the other FCC Commissioners and staff, as they continue to address the nation’s vital communications needs including closing the digital divide and insuring increased spectrum availability," said Comcast executive VP Mitch Rose. "As committed public servants Chairman Ajit Pai and Commissioner Michael O’Rielly prepare to leave the Commission in the new year, we thank them for their service...."

"The Internet Innovation Alliance congratulates Nathan Simington on his Senate confirmation to the Federal Communications Commission," said the Internet Innovation Alliance in a statement. "In these unprecedented times, America’s internet infrastructure has shown resilience that illustrates why our high-speed broadband communications is the envy of the world. As a member of the FCC, Simington’s wireless industry experience, grasp of 5G and understanding of the entire internet ecosystem will aid the Commission as it continues to craft policies that will help close the digital divide and advance next-generation networks."

Simington is currently with the National Telecommunications & Information Administration and before that worked for Brightstar.

"[We] congratulate Nathan Simington on receiving an affirmative confirmation vote in the U.S. Senate,” said Todd Schlekeway, president of NATE, Communications Infrastructure Contractors Association. “Over the years, NATE has established strong relationships with FCC Commissioners and their respective staff members and looks forward to working closely with Mr. Simington on the many policy and regulatory issues facing our dynamic industry. Looking ahead, NATE also looks forward to collaborating with the new Democrat Commissioner who is ultimately confirmed in 2021," Schlekeway added.

“The FCC plays a critical role in implementing policies to bridge the digital divide and Connect Americans Now looks forward to working with Mr. Simington to eliminate the broadband gap for every American,” said Connect Americans Now (CAN) executive director Richard T. Cullen. “The pandemic has exacerbated the impact of the digital divide on millions of unserved and underserved Americans, increasing the urgency for policymakers in Washington to tackle this challenge as a top priority.”

“We congratulate Nathan Simington on his confirmation as an FCC Commissioner and look forward to working with him on ways the FCC can support robust network investment to usher in the 4th industrial revolution and the transformational digital benefits it will bring to consumers and businesses,” said David Bartlett, VP of federal government affairs for Lumen (formerly CenturyLink). 

"WISPA extends a hearty welcome and congratulations to Nathan Simington for his Senate confirmation as FCC Commissioner today," said the Wireless Internet Service Providers Association. "He comes to the Commission at a time when the nation is at an important crossroads in getting all Americans online.  The pandemic revealed just how necessary broadband is for our health, safety and general welfare, and we look forward to working with him on growing broadband, as well as other policy matters during his tenure at the FCC.

"We’d like to also take this opportunity to thank Mike O’Rielly for his work on the Commission. He was a steadfast champion of the telecom industry.  He worked to keep regulation low, enabling growth and innovation in all of our networks.  And he understood how important it was to get service out to those in the digital divide, so all of us could prosper.  We wish him the best of luck and success as he moves on to other endeavors."

"We extend our congratulations to the newest FCC Commissioner, Nathan Simington, for his Senate confirmation," said Parents Television Counsel President Tim Winter. "We look forward to working collaboratively with him on FCC matters, especially those issues that come before the Commission that impact children and families. Broadcast decency laws must be enforced, the TV content ratings system must be improved to better protect children from inappropriate or harmful content, and the Commission must continue its regulatory oversight in the public interest, not the corporate interest,” said PTC President Tim Winter.

“To outgoing FCC Commissioner Mike O’Rielly, I offer my personal gratitude for his years of public service, and I wish him all the best in his future endeavors.”

"The Fiber Broadband Association congratulates Nathan Simington on his confirmation to the Federal Communications Commission," said FBA in a statement. "We look forward to his leadership at the FCC as our members work to close the digital divide with the deployment of all fiber networks."

Not everyone was breaking out the champagne.

"This is an utterly disappointing move that does nothing but block the FCC from ensuring people can connect as we move into the dark winter of the COVID-19 pandemic," said Evan Greer, deputy director of Fight for the Future. "Every single Senator who voted to confirm Nathan Simington betrayed their constituents and their oath to uphold the Constitution," she said.

“The confirmation of Nathan Simington to the FCC comes as no surprise, however, it does come with a cost to America’s unserved and underserved communities," said Ryan Johnston, policy counsel at Next Century Cities. 

“At a time when broadband access is critical and millions of people still lack basic access to the internet, we need Commissioners who are singularly focused on promoting universal access, ensuring that those who need to be connected will be. Without reliable connectivity, those in need are unable to attend class, work, obtain healthcare, or access government service.... “Unfortunately, this appointment was born of a desire to transform the FCC into speech police."

A divided Senate has approved President Trump's Republican nominee to the FCC, Nathan Simington.

Democrats strongly opposed the nomination of Simington, currently with the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, arguing it was a way to stymie the Democratic FCC agenda out of the gate, but Republicans prevailed in a straight party line vote 49-46, though with no floor defense of the President's nominee after Democrats had pilloried him.

Senate Republicans have consistently appeared unenthusiastic about the Simington nomination, not speaking up strongly for him during the Commerce Committee's approval of the nomination on Tuesday before voting (the same 49-46) to proceed to a vote on his nomination. 

Simington was the President's choice while traditionally congressional Republicans would have a voice in the pick.

He is expected to take his seat, succeeding outgoing commissioner Michael O'Rielly, late Thursday (Dec. 8) or Friday, following the FCC's Thursday public meeting.

President Donald Trump nominated O'Rielly for a second term, but pulled the nomination following a speech in which O'Rielly raised questions about efforts to regulate social media, something the President has been pushing the FCC to do.

Related: Report Says Simington Reach Out to Fox News on Sec. 230 Petition

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), ranking member on the Senate Commerce Committee, was the first to speak on the Simington nomination after the Senate, again divided along party lines, had voted to limit debate and proceed, eventually, to the nomination vote. 

She said she had questions about his neutrality and independence, given reports he had tried to enlist Fox News to spotlight the issue of regulating social media and given the abrupt withdrawal of O'Rielly's nomination in favor of Simington, who worked on NTIA's petition to the FCC seeking social media regulation, a petition Trump had mandated in an executive order as part of his effort to regulate sites, like Twitter and Facebook, he has long argued censor Republicans, including him.

Related: Trump Urges Confirmation of Simington

"I hope that we will not pass the Simington nomination," Cantwell said, but added that if he was to be confirmed, as assumed, her colleagues should move quickly to also approve a Democratic nominee to the commission, when one is chosen. She pointed out that, usually, Republican and Democratic FCC nominees are paired in such circumstances. A Republican Senate is not likely to rush to such confirmation, however.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), the second senator to speak on the nomination, pulled no punches. 

He said Simington was dangerous to the FCC at this moment in history, for which he was the wrong person at the wrong time, pointing to President Trump's attempts to retaliate against social media platforms, his attempts to enlist the FCC in that effort, and Simington's participation in that effort. 

Blumenthal called him unprepared and unqualified for the post. He also cited the potential gridlock issue and noted the usual bipartisan pairing of nominees. He urged a no vote.

Democrats have reason to be worried that Simington's installation could tie up the Democratic agenda after Jan. 20--there would be two Democrats and two Republicans--and until a third Democrat can be named to Pai's commission seat--he is exiting Jan. 20--which if Republicans retain control could be months down the road.

FCC commissioner Brendan Carr, who will be the only other Republican on the commission after the chairman exits, has been urging the Senate to confirm Simington so together they can thwart a Democratic FCC's moves out of the gate.

In an appearance on Fox Business' Cavuto Coast-to-Coast, Carr said: "I think it would be very valuable to get Simington across the finish line and help forestall what really would be billions of dollars worth of economic damage that I think a Democratic FCC would look to jam through from Day One. One thing a Democratic FCC is expected to do is restore net neutrality rules, which Carr has called "socialism in sheep's clothing."

According to multiple reports, Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has filed a cloture motion to end debate on the nomination of Republican Nathan Simington for a seat on the FCC being vacated by Michael O'Rielly.

A confirmation vote on the nomination, and Simington's swearing-in, could happen as early as next week.

O'Rielly's office said he plans to stay on the job until Simington is sworn in. The FCC has its monthly meeting next week (Dec. 10). O'Reilly can serve until the new Congress is seated or his replacement is sworn in.

Related: Divided Senate Commerce Approves Simington Nomination for Senate Vote

On the news that McConnell was moving on the nomination as soon as next week, America's Public Television Stations wanted to make sure it gave O'Rielly a shout-out before he left.

APTS President Patrick Butler congratulated O'Rielly on an "extraordinarily successful" tenure on the commission.

“We have been fortunate to work closely with Commissioner O’Rielly on issues ranging from ATSC 3.0 Next Gen TV services to educational children’s programming to public safety datacasting uses in America. We were honored to have Commissioner O’Rielly join us at our 2020 Public Media Summit this year, sharing his insights and expertise with hundreds of public television station leaders from across the country.

“Commissioner O’Rielly has been a strong supporter of public television and recognizes the value of our stations’ services to their communities, including the very rural areas that our stations reach with coverage of nearly 97 percent of our country’s population...."

Some Wyoming cable broadband providers have complained to FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly about potential overbuilding of their systems by the recipients of CARES Act COVID-19 ad bill grants. O'Reilly has, in turn, reached out to the state for some answers, according to a copy or a letter to Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon.

The grants are being administered by the Wyoming Business Council's (WBC) Connect Wyoming program, O'Rielly, who is no fan of using government money to overbuild existing networks built with private capital, told the governor that based on information brought to his attention, "the WBC has not publicly released the applications or proposed coverage maps for the grant recipients, nor has it taken the requisite steps to ensure subsidized overbuilding did not and will not occur."

CARES Act Bill Has Billions for Broadband

O'Rielly said that there are allegations--he does not say from whom--that one or more of the grant recipients will wind up overbuilding recipients of the FCC's Universal Service Fund Connect America Fun Phase II money. He said if that is true, it would "not only artificially impair the value of the FCC’s past and current subsidies but would also undercut providers’ willingness to compete in future FCC reverse auctions."

He told the governor he would like the WBC to immediately release coverage maps for its projects so that current cable and fiber broadband providers in the state can challenge duplicative projects and stop funding for any that subsidize overbuilding.

The CARES Act had $1.5 billion in funding to aid communities impacted by COVID-19 that could be used for broadband deployment among many other things. Then there was another $16 billion that could be tapped for distance learning, including connectivity.

Republican FCC nominee Nathan Simington dominated a Hill confirmation hearing Tuesday (Nov. 10), getting almost all the questioning from members of the Senate Commerce Committee.

Simington was among a trio of Trump nominees at the hearing--the others were for posts at NASA and Commerce--in the Senate Commerce Committee.

Simington was grilled on broadband subsidies, mapping, opening up spectrum, and particularly, on his view of Section 230 and regulating social media.

Simington said his regulatory philosophy would be guided by four principles: 1) regulatory stability, which he said meant placing the public interest first, but also meant not chilling communications development with too restrictive regulations; 2) universal connectivity, on which he said progress has been made that the country can be proud of; 3) public safety and national security, which meant reconciling spectrum conflicts and challenges and protecting the public interest in the midst of ongoing spectrum commercialization.

Related: Trump Urges Simington Confirmation at FCC 

Trump nominated Simington after pulling O'Rielly's nomination for a second term, reportedly after O'Rielly criticized the President's effort to regulate social media.

Simington is currently senior advisor at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is the President's chief communications advisory arm, where he worked on 5G security/supply chain issues.

He also worked on NTIA's petition to the FCC to come up with the regime for regulating social media that the President had called for and that O'Rielly had criticized, though Simington told the hearing audience that his role was minor editing and proofing after the policy had already been hammered out. He did say he had had conversations about the issue with the White House when he was being considered for the post.

Related: Trump Nominates NTIA Advisor to O'Rielly Seat

Simington is formerly senior counsel to wireless company Brightstar, where the White House points out he "negotiated deals with companies across the spectrum of the telecommunications and internet industry, including most of the world’s leading wireless carriers."

Before that he was at powerhouse law firm Kirkland & Ellis as an associate in its corporate practice.

It is unclear whether Simington will make it onto the commission. He was the choice of the outgoing President rather than the Senate Commerce Committee chairman, who by tradition the President often defers to for FCC seat picks. Wicker may have another choice for the seat, in which case Simington might not get a Senate vote. 

In any event, O'Rielly has to leave the commission before the 117th Congress convenes in January.

In an unusual move, President Donald Trump took to twitter to urge the confirmation of Nate Simington to succeed Michael O'Rielly as a Republican member of the FCC.

Trump pulled O'Rielly's nomination and replaced it with Simington, who reportedly is more attuned to the President's desire to regulate social media.

The President tweeted:

The President might be hoping to ensure there is a third vote for regulating social media by "clarifying" Section 230 of the Communications Act, which grants social media immunity from liabiltity over how they moderate third-party content. That is the effort O'Rielly questioned.

Simington is currently senior advisor at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is the President's chief communications advisory arm, where he worked on 5G security/supply chain issues.

He also reportedly worked on NTIA's petition to the FCC to come up with that regime for regulating social media that the President had called for. 

In his last speech as an FCC commissioner, Michael O'Rielly took aim at another Trump Administration proposal--a government-issue 5G network.

O'Rielly is having to leave the commission because President Trump withdrew his nomination, a move most believe stemmed from the commissioner's criticism of the President's effort to enlist the FCC in regulating social media--O'Rielly has declined to speculate on the reasons for his abrupt turn of fortunes after being nominated by the President for a new, five-year term.

In a speech this week to a virtual meeting of CTIA, the wireless association, O'Rielly slammed a proposal being floated by the Administration to create a government-backed wholesale 5G network.

Related: Trump Rescinds O'Rielly Nomination

DOD has asked for comment on the government partnering with the private sector to secure the next generation of wireless internet access, which will be the conduit for an internet of things (IoT) world that will connect myriad systems from the power grid to medical devices to toasters.

O'Rielly said that would definitely be the wrong direction to go--he was obviously preaching to the choir when it came to opposing a government-backed network that would compete with the private sector.

Calling it the "giant elephant" in CTIA's virtual conference room, O'Rielly said the proposal was a completely indefensible, horrible, idea that had to be rejected.

"For the last few years this 'idea' has been floated, rejected, floated, rejected, and just recently floated again. Now, it seems to be under consideration once again by some at the highest levels of our government," he said.

He said for the government to use valuable mid-band spectrum to directly compete with the private sector "flies in the face of every principle of American free enterprise."

He called the supposed justifications for the network, including security and closing the digital divide, were "beyond flimsy."

O'Rielly said there was "zero reason" to think that any single entity, backed by the government or not, could get a network to the hardest-to-reach places, particularly starting from square one and without any relationships with existing providers. "My conversations with wireless industry participants, and many others who track this industry very closely, suggest that not one existing provider has any interest in being a [wholesale] subscriber. "Yet, it would take a tremendous amount of paid traffic to make the economics feasible."

Related: Trump Nominates NTIA Adviser for O'Rielly Seat

As to the "preposterous" argument that a wholesale network with hundreds of partners would somehow be more secure that the existing private sector model, he said that didn't even pass the smell test.

To those in the audience mourning his exit--O'Rielly has long advocated for clearing regulator hurdles and freeing up more spectrum for wireless--the commissioner said not to worry.

"This should not be viewed as sad in any way, as I am, in fact, very excited for what lies ahead," he said. "For 27 years, including the last seven at the Commission, I have truly enjoyed serving the American people in various positions within the federal government. Eventually, everyone leaves the Commission by one means or another, so I am happy to leave with all of my faculties intact."

FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly said he will be leaving when his term ends [either with the appointment of a successor or by January, whichever comes first] and signaled his supporters don't need to advocate for keeping him on the commission.

The President rescinded O'Rielly's nomination after the commissioner criticized an effort to regulate social media that the President supports.

Related: Trump Rescinds O'Rielly Nomination

At the FCC's public meeting Wednesday (Sept. 30), O'Rielly used his opening statement to say he had enjoyed his time on the commission but that the fact was that his service was coming to an end regardless of the outcome of the election and that while there had been speculation on whether he would return to the commission under "certain circumstance," he said: "I do not seek for anyone to pursue my continued service at the commission beyond my current term."

FCC chairman Ajit Pai said O'Rielly has served with great honor and distinction and had led on issues like KidVid and freeing up spectrum. Commissioner Brendan Carr echoed the chairman's sentiments. Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said it had been an honor to be O'Rielly's colleague and friend. Commissioner Geoffrey Starks thanked O'Rielly for his service and leadership.

Exiting Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly isn't going without a final push for more broadcast deregulation.

In a blog post, O'Rielly, whose re-nomination was withdrawn by the President after he criticized a social media regulatory effort the President is backing, 

He praised FCC chairman Ajit Pai's media modernization program efforts to date, which he said had allowed "real" burdens imposed on broadcasters to be lifted so they could better serve their viewers and the public interest.

Related: Trump Rescinds O'Rielly Nomination

But he said much work remains to be done. He offered up some things the FCC could do quickly to "improve the plight of struggling broadcasters," adding: "As many broadcasters seek to rebound from the double-whammy of COVID-19 and asymmetric competition from unregulated internet-based providers, these reforms are more critical than ever."

Among his suggestions: 

1. Lift the freeze on TV station tech upgrade applications which was imposed in advance of the incentive auction. "Now that the repack has essentially concluded, stations should be permitted to start filing applications for needed upgrades," he said.

2. Update the failing station waiver criteria. The FCC allows common ownership of stations that would otherwise violate local ownership rules if one of them is in distress. Currently the criteria for a station to be sufficiently failing to qualify are: "(1) one of the merging stations has had a low all-day audience share (i.e. 4 percent or lower); (2) the station has had negative cash flow for the previous three years; (3) the merger will produce tangible and verifiable public interest benefits; and (4) the in-market buyer is the only reasonably available candidate willing and able to acquire and operate the station, and selling the station to an out-of-market buyer would result in an artificially depressed price. By meeting each of the prongs, an application is presumed to be in the public interest."

O'Rielly said the first two prongs need adjusting to meet the moment and the future. He said that even though some stations are doing well in terms of viewership during the pandemic, the ad dollars have dried up and the stations are "hemorrhaging cash trying to keep their journalists safe and well-equipped to cover current events, both in the field and in the studios. He also said three years of negative cash flow is too many to make a station wait before getting help. He suggested 18 months might be better, and negative cash flow replaced by a combination of operating loss, debt, and/or the inability to raise capital.

O'Rielly also said that the FCC should allow waivers of its LPTV rules to allow in-market moves of more than 30 miles and at least contemplate making it easier for VHF stations to "upgrade" to UHF or change communities of license.

"While holistic change is unlikely in the near-term," O'Rielly said. "The changes I’m proposing today could be pursued within the bounds of our current rules while significantly improving the overall regulatory regime."

Commissioner Michael O'Rielly used his written testimony for Thursday's oversight hearing in the House Communications Subcommittee as something of a farewell address to the telecommunications nation.

President Trump withdrew O'Rielly's nomination after he had already had a confirmation hearing and appeared headed for a new, five-year term--and after a speech in which O'Rielly criticized an effort to regulate social media that the President supports. The President this week offered up a new nominee.

The subcommittee was a fitting venue for the valedictory since O'Rielly is a former staffer who worked on the 1996 Telecom Act, though the title of the hearing, "Trump FCC: Four Years of Lost Opportunities," suggested the Democratic leadership didn't see much to celebrate.

Saying it was probably the last time he would appear before the Congress as an FCC commissioner, O'Rielly outlined his record then spoke briefly about the withdrawal of his nomination, which appeared to come as a surprise and which he suggested was not a retaliation for any specific action, at least as far as he knew.

Related: Sen. Puts Hold on O'Rielly Nomination

"[T]here seems to be a great deal of interest in what led to my nomination for a new term being withdrawn by President Trump," he told the committee according to a copy of his prepared testimony. "In all honesty, there is no salacious story to report. No demands were made to support any position, and no pressure was applied to take any particular action."

"I was informed that the president was withdrawing my nomination, as is his prerogative, by a very short phone call," he said. "I had no conversations with the White House on withdrawing the nomination prior to that point and none since."

But most of the relatively brief statement focused on what he had done while on the commission. 

"I am incredibly proud of the amount and quality of work product I have accomplished for the American people during my tenure," he said. "It has been a tremendous honor to hold this position, and I have approached the role as though you were in my seat, guided by fidelity to the law and the will of lawmakers; respect for the millions of Americans you represent here in Washington; regard for those appearing before the Commission and the arguments they raise; and a determination never to take a single day, meeting, site visit, or conversation for granted. To paraphrase former President Ronald Reagan in his farewell address to the nation, my team and I weren’t just marking time. We made a difference."

O'Rielly said that included working to expand broadband availability, modernizing regulations, and increasing transparency.

The President has made it official Wednesday (Sept. 16), sending to the Senate the nomination of Nathan Simington for the Republican FCC seat of Michael O'Rielly, whose term has expired.

The President had already signaled that notification was coming.

O'Rielly's renomination was withdrawn by the President, apparently because O'Rielly was critical of the President's effort to regulate social media.

Simington is currently senior advisor at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is the President's chief communications advisory arm, where he worked on 5G security/supply chain issues.

He also reportedly worked on NTIA's petition to the FCC to come up with the regime for regulating social media that the President had called for and that O'Rielly had criticized.

Simington is formerly senior counsel to wireless company Brightstar, where the White House points out he "negotiated deals with companies across the spectrum of the telecommunications and internet industry, including most of the world’s leading wireless carriers."

"NAB congratulates Nathan Simington on his nomination to the FCC," said National Association of Broadcasters president Gordon Smith. "We wish him the best during the confirmation process and look forward to working with him on the critical issues affecting local radio and TV broadcasters should he be confirmed to the Commission."

“CTIA and the wireless industry congratulate Nathan Simington on his nomination as an FCC Commissioner," said CTIA president Meredith Attwell Baker. "He has a wide range of experience in the public and private sectors and strong knowledge of the wireless industry, which will be important as the FCC continues its work to help America lead the emerging 5G economy.”

President Trump has announced his intention to nominate Nathan Simington to fill the seat being vacated by Michael O'Rielly, whose renomination was withdrawn by the President apparently because O'Rielly was critical of the President's effort to regulate social media.

Simington is currently senior advisor at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is the President's chief communications advisory arm, where he worked on 5G security/supply chain issues.

He also reportedly worked on NTIA's petition to the FCC to come up with the regime for regulating social media that the President had called for and that O'Rielly had criticized.

Simington is formerly senior counsel to wireless company Brightstar, where the White House points out he "negotiated deals with companies across the spectrum of the telecommunications and internet industry, including most of the world’s leading wireless carriers.

Before that he was at powerhouse law firm Kirkland & Ellis as an associate in its corporate practice.

O'Rielly can continue to serve in his post either until Congress adjourns or Simington has had a nomination hearing in the Senate and is confirmed in that body, whichever comes first.

If O'Rielly left before his mandatory exit, it would leave the FCC at a 2-2 tie, which Republicans clearly don't want. And even if he stayed through the end of December, the FCC could be at a 2-2 tie depending on how long it took to vet and vote a successor given the intervention of a presidential election and a lame-duck Congress with few legislative days.  

O'Rielly has already been vetted and voted in the Commerce Committee and had only been awaiting a Senate vote when the President abruptly pulled the nomination, likely over an O'Rielly speech to the Media Institute in which he raised concerns about the negative consequences of regulating social media company content, something the President has pushed.  

But there had also been a hold on O'Rielly's nomination placed by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, who was unhappy with an FCC decision to allow Ligado to use spectrum adjacent to GPS for terrestrial broadband. That was a unanimous decision, but O'Rielly's is the only FCC nomination up for renewal and that hold was considered a signal to the whole FCC of Inhofe's unhappiness rather than any desire to derail O'Rielly. 

O'Rielly tweeted his support for his successor, saying: "I extend my sincere congrats to Mr. Simington for selection to join @FCC, and offer best wishes for a smooth confirmation process and successful term at the Commission."

"NAB congratulates Nathan Simington on his nomination to the FCC," said National Association of Broadcasters President Gordon Smith."We wish him the best during the confirmation process and look forward to working with him on the critical issues affecting local radio and TV broadcasters should he be confirmed to the Commission."

Carolyn Roddy, a senior advisor at the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, and Hill staffer Crystal Tully, are two names that have surfaced as potential Republican FCC nominees to replace Michael O'Rielly, whose nomination was abruptly withdrawn by President Trump. 

Tully is the deputy staff director of the Senate Commerce Committee. She was formerly the on the committee's communications and tech policy teams and before that counsel to former chairman Roger Thune and senior advisor to current chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). She was also an FCC law clerk. 

Tully is said to be Wicker's choice for the job. Traditionally Senate Commerce chair gets a say in FCC nominees, since it is the committee of principal jurisdiction, though breaking with tradition has been a hallmark of this President.  

Roddy was a member of Trump's FCC transition team following the 2016 election and was Metro Atlanta Regional Deputy Coordinator of the campaign. She was briefly an FCC lawyer in 2017. 

Roddy's resume, according to ProPublica, includes regional regulatory counsel for Sprint; Counsel at Troutman Sanders, LLP in Atlanta; and director of regulatory affairs at the Satellite Industry Association in Washington. She has also been an adjunct professor at Atlanta's John Marshall Law School. 

O'Rielly doesn't have to go anywhere until a new nominee is vetted and voted, which in an election year is unlikely to happen before year's end. He will have to exit by the beginning of January anyway since he can serve until the end of this Congress before he has to leave. 

O'Rielly is not entirely out of the picture, either, with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sens. Thune, and John Cornyn (R-Texas) said still to be advocating for his return. 

If O'Rielly left before his mandatory exit, it would leave the FCC at a 2-2 tie, which Republicans clearly don't want. And even if he stayed through the end of December, the FCC could be at a 2-2 tie depending on how long it took to vet and vote a successor given the intervention of a presidential election and a lame-duck Congress with few legislative days.  

O'Rielly has already been vetted and voted in the Commerce Committee and had only been awaiting a Senate vote when the President abruptly pulled the nomination, likely over an O'Rielly speech to the Media Institute in which he raised concerns about the negative consequences of regulating social media company content, something the President has pushed.  

But there had also been a hold on O'Rielly's nomination placed by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, who was unhappy with an FCC decision to allow Ligado to use spectrum adjacent to GPS for terrestrial broadband. That was a unanimous decision, but O'Rielly's is the only FCC nomination up for renewal and that hold was considered a signal to the whole FCC of Inhofe's unhappiness rather than his desire to derail O'Rielly. 

If the White House wants to get a new commissioner vetted by the FBI and the Senate Commerce Committee and confirmed by the full Senate before the potential of a two-two stalemate becomes a reality, it will need to offer up a nomination soon, and even then it might not be able to avoid that scenario.

O'Rielly had no comment on the withdrawal or his future plans, according to a staffer. 

Carolyn Roddy, a senior advisor at the National Telecommunications & Information Administration, and Hill staffer Crystal Tully, are two names that have surfaced as potential Republican FCC nominees to replace Michael O'Rielly, whose nomination was abruptly withdrawn by President Trump. 

Tully is the deputy staff director of the Senate Commerce Committee. She was formerly the on the committee's communications and tech policy teams and before that counsel to former chairman Roger Thune and senior advisor to current chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.). She was also an FCC law clerk. 

Tully is said to be Wicker's choice for the job. Traditionally Senate Commerce chair gets a say in FCC nominees, since it is the committee of principal jurisdiction, though breaking with tradition has been a hallmark of this President.  

Roddy was a member of Trump's FCC transition team following the 2016 election and was Metro Atlanta Regional Deputy Coordinator of the campaign. She was briefly an FCC lawyer in 2017. 

Roddy's resume, according to ProPublica, includes regional regulatory counsel for Sprint; Counsel at Troutman Sanders, LLP in Atlanta; and director of regulatory affairs at the Satellite Industry Association in Washington. She has also been an adjunct professor at Atlanta's John Marshall Law School. 

O'Rielly doesn't have to go anywhere until a new nominee is vetted and voted, which in an election year is unlikely to happen before year's end. He will have to exit by the beginning of January anyway since he can serve until the end of this Congress before he has to leave. 

O'Rielly is not entirely out of the picture, either, with Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Sens. Thune, and John Cornyn (R-Texas) said still to be advocating for his return. 

If O'Rielly left before his mandatory exit, it would leave the FCC at a 2-2 tie, which Republicans clearly don't want. And even if he stayed through the end of December, the FCC could be at a 2-2 tie depending on how long it took to vet and vote a successor given the intervention of a presidential election and a lame-duck Congress with few legislative days.  

O'Rielly has already been vetted and voted in the Commerce Committee and had only been awaiting a Senate vote when the President abruptly pulled the nomination, likely over an O'Rielly speech to the Media Institute in which he raised concerns about the negative consequences of regulating social media company content, something the President has pushed.  

But there had also been a hold on O'Rielly's nomination placed by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), chairman of the Armed Services Committee, who was unhappy with an FCC decision to allow Ligado to use spectrum adjacent to GPS for terrestrial broadband. That was a unanimous decision, but O'Rielly's is the only FCC nomination up for renewal and that hold was considered a signal to the whole FCC of Inhofe's unhappiness rather than his desire to derail O'Rielly. 

If the White House wants to get a new commissioner vetted by the FBI and the Senate Commerce Committee and confirmed by the full Senate before the potential of a two-two stalemate becomes a reality, it will need to offer up a nomination soon, and even then it might not be able to avoid that scenario.

O'Rielly had no comment on the withdrawal or his future plans, according to a staffer. 

FCC member Michael O’Rielly attended Thursday’s monthly Open Meeting, the only commissioner to wear a jacket and tie for the abbreviated online session. But he didn’t offer a clue by press time as to whether he will keep his seat — as he is entitled to do until Congress adjourns, presumably around Christmastime — or if he will move on sooner in the wake of the unexpected White House decision to pull his renomination on Monday (Aug. 3).

The Trump administration offered no explanation for the sudden withdrawal of O’Rielly’s reappointment, which was approved by the Senate Commerce Committee in mid-July and was awaiting full Senate confirmation. Although Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) had threatened to stymie the process because of disagreement about O’Rielly’s vote to approve Ligado Networks' application to build a low-power terrestrial 5G network in the L-band spectrum, the real rationale stems from the commissioner’s outspoken challenge to administration efforts to force the FCC to handle Section 230 issues in the 1996 Communications Decency Act.

O’Rielly has questioned President Donald Trump’s executive order that would require the FCC to oversee Section 230 enforcement of social-media platforms. In an interview on C-SPAN and at a Media Institute presentation, O’Rielly contended that the FCC does not have Congressional authority to regulate social-media activities. 

The timing is particularly awkward. If O’Rielly does leave now, the agency will face partisan 2-2 votes on controversial issues until a successor is installed. 

Several names have already been bruited about, mostly Capitol Hill and executive branch staffers, but Washington policy experts pointed out there is insufficient time for the FBI to conduct background checks on potential candidates. Moreover, the Senate Commerce Committee is unlikely to take up a confirmation hearing in the waning months of this session.

Looming over everything is the November election, which may set a new course at the White House and the Senate. If a Democratic administration takes over, it would appoint a Democrat to O’Rielly’s seat. 

The White House nominated O’Rielly, a member of the FCC’s three-Republican majority, on March 18 for a term that officially began on July 1, 2019. He has been serving continually since his initial appointment in 2013 and President Barack Obama appointed him to a full term in 2015.

Michael O’Rielly’s renomination as an FCC commissioner was rescinded by President Trump Monday, according to published reports.

O’Rielly was originally nominated to the FCC by President Barack Obama and was sworn in November 2013. He was sworn into a second term in 2015. His term expired in June.

Related: Trump renominated O’Rielly in March

O'Rielly is a conservative who generally favors deregulation, including of ISPs and lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations.   

The renomination of O’Rielly for another term was reportedly put on hold in July by Senator Jim Inhofe because of the FCC’s decision to allow Ligado Networks to deploy a lower-power national mobile broadband network. 

“We should blow up the franchise model for cable regulation,” FCC Commissioner Michael O’Rielly said on Wednesday, adding that the “mind-boggling … over-regulation of broadcasting needs to be shredded.”

And he was just getting started as O’Rielly described his goal “to deregulate legacy industries” as part of the sweeping process reform he has championed during his seven years as a commissioner. In remarks to the Media Institute's monthly Communications Forum in Washington on July 29 (speaking from his home via a webcast), O’Rielly also criticized the Department of Justice for “repeatedly and inexplicably” failing to evaluate the competitive landscape in the new digital ecosystem. He denounced the lethargic status of broadcast ownership diversity. He lamented slow decision-making to release additional spectrum. And, in an upbeat riff, he lit up when describing NextGen TV, emphasizing how “implementation of ATSC 3.0 can significantly update over-the-air products and services.”

“Notably, the NextGen TV process has been one of the few opportunities for broadcasters to make their own decisions about deployment without constantly looking to the regulator for permission,” O’Rielly enthused.

Focusing on the FCC's extensive process reform agenda, which includes industry realignment, O’Rielly said, “I remain hopeful we can close out all open media modernization proceedings by the end of the year.”

Related: Bezos Predicts Fire TV Deal for HBO Max 

He reminded the audience that he has been urging new rules to dispense with the cable attributable interest record keeping requirement and fix a loophole in the timing of program carriage complaints.

“However, from my conversations with members of the industry, these types of changes merely help around the edges and do not significantly reform the underlying regulatory framework,” O’Rielly said, complaining that “even such modest proposals receive pushback within and outside the agency.”

Lambasting entrenched industry interests as well as regulators, the commissioner lamented that “despite all the changes in the marketplace that are widely agreed upon, we still have great difficulty making even the smallest of reforms.”

“Grasping for relevance, backward looking officials and stakeholders refuse to lessen their grip on the remaining regulated industries,” O’Rielly said. He criticized the “thinly veiled guise of ‘local control’” that franchise authorities continue to use to “extract undue bounties” from cable operators.

“Amazingly, in some cases, local officials have even campaigned on promises of mandated network builds, additional tax revenues, and higher franchise fees, superficially promising the ‘preservation’ of local jobs,” O’Rielly explained, emphasizing his belief that these fees prevent operators from “using those funds to lower consumer bills and deploy new services.”

“It’s time to get local officials out of the business of harassing cable companies,” he said, suggesting that the process can start with removal of some “burdens,” such as ending local review of transactions, requiring common accounting practices, preventing rights-of-way discrimination, reducing PEG and INET mandates, and standardizing customer service requirements.

O’Rielly observed that the cable rules are “completely contrary to promoting network efficiencies and economies of scale, both of which are features that high-tech companies possess and use to compete head-to-head with legacy providers.”

Moving on to broadcasting, O’Rielly said current rules are “outdated” and don’t account for certain mergers “that are in the public interest and would provide increased local and live programming.”

Broadcasters Must Choose How to Use NextGen TV

O’Rielly repeated his enthusiasm for NextGen TV during the online Q&A session, emphasizing that it’s “inherent upon broadcasters” to determine what features and services to offer via the new digital platform. “There are lots of different basic directions they can go [to assure] stickiness and encourage audiences to stay with them."

Earlier in his prepared remarks, O’Rielly acknowledged, “We don’t yet know which NextGen business models will ultimately prevail” citing options such as broadcast targeted advertising and OTT-like functionality.

“The point is, here’s a real chance to let the market decide how a flexible standard can be utilized, based on what consumers prefer.”

In response to a later question about collaboration between broadcasters’ NextGen TV and wireless 5G development, O’Rielly envisioned - without details – possible partnership between 5G providers and TV station operators “to reach viewers during the pandemic.”

Embarrassing Diversity Record

Turning to ownership diversity in the broadcasting industry, O’Rielly confessed that, “Make no mistake: the dearth of African American ownership of local broadcast properties is beyond embarrassing, resting in the low single digits.”

“No one should be able to say with a straight face that our rules meant to promote diversity have been anything but a complete failure,” he said, contending that “removing our limitations would set the stage for more minority investment and ownership.” He cited FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s effort to adopt a radio incubator program that would entice existing broadcast owners to partner with minority small business entrepreneurs. But he admitted that the initiative “was upended by a few squabbling industry participants” when the effort was expanded into television ownership.

“Absent Supreme Court intervention, it will be years before any action is even considered again at the Commission,” he said. “This represents a huge disappointment for the agency and a lost opportunity for society.”

O’Rielly declined to describe his plans to reevaluate the Ligado approval, which has led Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) to hold back his Senate confirmation for another term as an FCC Commissioner. The Senate Commerce Committee approved O’Rielly’s re-appointment last week, but Inhofe has protested that the seven-year commission member’s support of the Ligado plan to use L-Band spectrum to support 5G and other internet of things services.

“I’ll work with his staff,” O’Rielly said, referring to Inhofe’s office. Emphatically, he insisted that “our job is to reform the rules to be in line with the marketplace.”

Related: Ligado to FCC: NTIA's Petition Fails on All Counts

During a wide-ranging Q&A session, O’Rielly fielded queries about 5G (which he had barely mentioned in his formal remarks), the escalating Communications Decency Act (“Section 230”) controversy, the post-pandemic regulatory outlook, diversity and payola.

In response to a Multichannel News question about Wednesday’s House hearings on high-tech, O’Rielly shrugged that, “The FCC doesn’t have a great deal of authority over high tech companies,” but he acknowledged that “sometimes they go into our space,” citing Amazon’s satellite project.

He briefly alluded that hearings would entail Silicon Valley’s opposition to Section 230 requirements, but dropped the topic saying that he has just begun to read the last documents from NTIA and other entities.

Related: Study: FCC Needs to Double Licensed Midband Spectrum for 5G

As for 5G, which he barely mentioned in his prepared remarks, O’Rielly acknowledged there is “No doubt that the pandemic has slowed development,” but he voiced confidence that the growth will evolve. He contended that this is “not just a race against China” for 5G dominance, citing a few other countries which intend to be very active 5G developers. He said he expects Open Standards to emerge for 5G.

“U.S. wireless providers are doing a wonderful job,” he said, “I believe they’ll continue to rollout 5G.”

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) has reportedly put a hold on the renomination of Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly over the senator's opposition to the FCC's decision to approve Ligado's use of satellite spectrum for terrestrial broadband.

Related: Senate Commerce Hosts Rousing Ligado Debate

In a report in Politico that the hold had been placed, Randolph May, president of free market think tank Free State Foundation, tweeted his disapproval:

The FCC unanimously granted the proposal from Ligado (formerly LightSquared) to use satellite spectrum adjacent to GPS spectrum for terrestrial broadband so long as it meets various conditions to prevent interference with that adjacent GPS, but that hasn't stopped critics on the Hill and in the Trump Administration from slamming the decision and trying to reverse it, Inhofe among them, as his tweets on the subject this week made clear, saying he would continue to fight the FCC until the decision was overturned.

While Inhofe and others said the Ligado interference threat is too great, the FCC said there are sufficient protections for GPS. 

O'Rielly's nomination was favorably reported out of the Senate Commerce Committee last week for a new, five-year, term on the commission. But a single senator can hold up a full-Senate vote on a nomination.

Such holds are not unusual.

In 2018, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W. Va.) has put a hold on the renomination of FCC commissioner Brendan Carr, but was is not over anything Carr had done.

It happened to Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, who--and this was unusual--eventually had to exit the commission because her term expired before renomination. She was eventually returned to her seat after the political smoke cleared. As with Carr, the hold on her nomination was not related to her or her job performance. Holds can be placed for any reason or no reason and legislators don't have to explain them.

Former FCC chairman Tom Wheeler also saw his nomination held up for months by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

The nomination of Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly for a new, five-year, term on the FCC has been favorably reported out of the Senate Commerce Committee and now moves to the full Senate for a vote.  

That came by voice vote Wednesday (July 22), but with ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) voting no, even though, procedural, she was the one to propose that it be reported favorably. Also asked to be recorded as "no" on the O'Rielly nomination were Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii). 

Related: O'Rielly Nomination Vote Scheduled 

In explaining her no vote, Cantwell pointed out that in 2018, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel concluded that O'Rielly had violated the Hatch Act with political comments made at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) conference.*

O'Rielly was issued a warning letter that a repeat of such statements could incur more than a warning. O'Rielly countered that he disagreed that an offhand remark was a violation, but said he took the warning seriously.

Cantwell also said that O'Rielly "had recently injected, I believe, politics into part of the spectrum issue," which she said she found "disturbing." She did not elaborate. 

In contrast, Committee chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said he looked forward to advancing O'Rielly's nomination. He said he appreciated O'Rielly's commitment to the speedy deployment of broadband, particularly given the pandemic and the greater reliance on connectivity, as well as his commitment to insuring it was targeted to areas that need it most.  

Like his fellow Republicans, O'Rielly wants the FCC to focus on the unserved first, rather than overbuilding existing service. 

O'Rielly's term expired at the end of June 2019, but commissioners can continue to serve until the close of the next Congress. The new term would date from July 1, 2019.  

O'Rielly, who has been on the FCC since 2013, is a conservative former Hill staffer who generally favors deregulation, including of ISPs, and lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations.    

He has also pushed for the FCC to collect better data on broadband availability before handing out billions for 5G buildouts. 

“Charter congratulates Commissioner Mike O’Rielly on his confirmation by the Senate Commerce Committee for another term at the Federal Communications Commission," said the company in a statement. "During his time at the FCC, Commissioner O’Rielly has demonstrated a strong commitment to creating a regulatory environment that encourages broadband buildout and has consistently promoted balanced spectrum policies that drive American innovation forward. As people across the country have become increasingly reliant on connectivity in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Commissioner O’Rielly has pushed to significantly expand broadband to those who still lack access. We look forward seeing Commissioner O’Rielly’s re-nomination confirmed by the full Senate.”

* Asked at a CPAC panel session how to avoid the regulatory issue ping-pong of changing administrations, O'Rielly said: "I think what we can do is make sure as conservatives that we elect good people to both the House, the Senate, and make sure that President Trump gets reelected." O'Rielly told the special counsel he was not advocating for the President's election but meant to relay the point that "the only way to retain that current outcome was to maintain the current leaders in government. In other words, retaining the current Administration is the only sure way to prevent regulatory ping-ponging.”

For those of us who follow the broadcast industry closely, seeing examples of local broadcasters continuing to invest in their local news programming, and even expanding coverage, during the last few troubling months has been encouraging, though not surprising. We should all be able to agree that coverage of local issues has rarely been more important than now, as we work together in our communities and across the country to rebuild our economy after the devastating impacts of the recent health crisis.   

The success of local television news in some markets comes even as the broadcast industry in general faces monumental challenges that existed apart from COVID-19, largely due to competition from unregulated high-tech companies openly competing for the same local advertising dollars.  And, these successes come despite the obstruction of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which overturned well-reasoned efforts by the Federal Communications Commission to modernize outdated media ownership rules last fall.

Stations’ Local Advantage

In the face of these challenges, local news is one of the primary distinguishing features giving television stations their best opportunity to compete in today’s crowded video marketplace, and, in some cases, the best opportunity to help keep them on the air.

So how exactly are broadcasters using local news to gain an edge?  While I am not endorsing any particular business model or company, one station group has taken a creative approach, and it has delivered on promises made to viewers in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

Earlier this year, I toured the Gray Television Washington News Bureau, a news team of about a dozen employees based in Washington, D.C., that feeds station-requested programming — including national coverage of the pandemic — back to all of Gray’s local television stations, which are spread across 36 states and 93 different markets, including in Sioux Falls.  Ask any member of Congress or senator from Appalachia, the Southeast, Great Lakes or Midwest, and they likely know who their local Gray-owned affiliate is, often as a result of the work of Gray’s Washington bureau.

The strategy of sharing scarce resources to improve efficiency has been emulated by Gray Television within a single market as well and has been instrumental to help keep stations afloat both during normal times and recent events. Local viewers in Sioux Falls, prior to this year, had only three local television stations providing news, with one of the station’s newsrooms on the verge of collapse. That station, NBC affiliate KDLT, which hadn’t yet reached the “failing firm” thresholds under commission rules, was poised to lay off most of its newsroom this year if it had not been purchased by Gray and combined with the newsroom of Gray’s existing ABC affiliate, KSFY.  The buyout not only saved jobs but also led to a direct increase in local news programming and greater demand for news talent in this market.  

The commission’s approval of this small-market combination was decried by critics, despite ensuring access to multiple local news outlets for viewers in eastern South Dakota.  By combining forces, KSFY and KDLT now provide viewers with non-stop news programming from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. every weekday, with an expected 3.5 hours each morning coming next year, in addition to new weekend programming — a great outcome for local journalism and coverage of important issues. These changes were made even before the recent health matters transformed our way of life.  

Since the end of March, Gray also has added a first-of-its-kind 9 p.m. newscast for the market. This is in addition to providing live coverage of past press conferences from Gov. Kristi Noem and state health officials, along with commercial-free town halls with state government officials. None of these programming changes that helped keep South Dakotans informed about recent developments would have been possible without Gray’s acquisition of KDLT.      

This combined approach has meant that viewers in Sioux Falls have access to 35% more unique local news hours per week, along with a newly minted news desk in the state capital of Pierre (population 14,000) and access to Gray’s Washington bureau for perspectives on how activities in our nation’s capital affect the state. More local programming also has meant the sale of more local ads, bolstering revenue that stays in the local community, which is especially important during this period of decreased advertising budgets.

Small Markets Need Flexibility

Contrary to popular belief, this combination of stations has led to lower advertising rates for local businesses, which are seeking to regain their economic footing. By recognizing that small television markets need flexi­bility that rightfully exists for some larger markets, the current Commission has shown that thinking outside the traditional media ownership box yields pro-consumer and pro-competition results.

Daring to save local television stations and trying to ensure competition in small markets through this approach doesn’t come without criticism. But promoting a positive environment for broadcasting in today’s media marketplace requires a broader perspective and a willingness to try new approaches to policy.

The Senate Commerce Committee has scheduled a vote on the nomination of Michael O'Rielly to a second term on the commission. 

O'Rielly's is one of a number of nominations scheduled for a vote and an executive session July 22. 

The committee held a nomination hearing for O'Rielly June 16. 

Related: O'Rielly Says He Won't Vote to Hand Out Money Before Maps 

O'Rielly's term expired at the end of June 2019, but commissioners can continue to serve until the close of the next Congress. The new term would date from July 1, 2019.  

O'Rielly is a conservative former Hill staffer who generally favors deregulation, including of ISPs and lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations.   

FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly's nomination by President Trump for a new term has some fans pushing for a swift committee and full-Senate vote. 

The Senate Commerce Committee held a nomination hearing for O'Rielly Tuesday (June 16), with a committee vote next on the agenda. 

O'Rielly's term expired at the end of June 2019, but commissioners can continue to serve until the close of the next Congress. The new term would date from July 1, 2019. 

O'Rielly is a conservative former Hill staffer who generally favors deregulation, including of ISPs and lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations.  

All that is just fine with the Free State Foundation, a limited government think tank, and competitive carriers. 

“I have watched dozens of FCC commissioners perform their duties over four decades, and many, from both parties, have served with distinction. But I will say, without any hesitation, that Mike O’Rielly is in the very top ranks of the commissioner cohort," said Free State Foundation president Randolph May. "His combination of experience and expertise, commitment to free market-oriented principles, willingness to work with all his colleagues, and roll-up-his-sleeves work-hard mentality, all advance the cause of achieving sound market-oriented communications policy. And he is always on the lookout to reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens whose costs outweigh their benefits and impair consumer welfare. 

I especially applaud the work commissioner O’Rielly has pursued doggedly in the area of FCC institutional reform.... I urge the Senate to speedily confirm commissioner O’Rielly to another term."    

FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly signaled to the Senate Commerce Committee that he won't vote on a final order to start handing out billions in 5G buildout subsidy money before the FCC comes up with new availability maps as directed by Congress.

The FCC voted in April to seek comment on a proposal to give out up to $9 billion over a decade for 5G buildouts, which is about $450 million per year more than the Universal Service Fund (USF) Mobility Fund allocation, which it is replacing. The extra money will also come from USF. The FCC will target rural areas that will be less likely to get 5G absent that support. 

The "maps before money" mantra is more associated with Democrat Jessica Rosenworcel and the FCC's $16 billion Rural Digital Opportunities Fund, but O'Rielly, who was being grilled in his nomination hearing in the Senate Commerce Committee Tuesday (June 16), draws a distinction. 

"[U]nlike the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) proceeding which was already in motion prior to the passage of the Broadband DATA Act, the Rural 5G Fund mechanism appears to be within the ambit of a 'new award of funding' for which the FCC would need to use the statutorily-required maps," he said when he voted for the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking back in April. 

O'Rielly is all for expanding 5G, but as a former Hill staffer, O'Rielly is also keenly attuned to "intent of Congress" issues in implementing legislation and has questions about the FCC's legal authority to proceed with funding before the FCC has produced mobile coverage maps as directed by the Broadband DATA Act.  

But those appeared to have been answered in the negative. He first said he would be "hesitant" to move forward, but Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Ohio), chairman of the committee, elicited a full stop. 

O'Rielly said that if Wicker's position as one of the authors of the Broadband DATA Act, which required new maps, was that the FCC could not proceed without them, then he agreed.  

"So, we've moved from serious reservations to you would commit not to support moving forward until we get the maps?"  

"Yes," said O'Rielly. 

FCC chairman Ajit Pai has pointed out that the FCC can't get those maps done until Congress appropriates money for the job.

FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly told the Senate Commerce Committee Tuesday (June 16) that there continues to be a disconnect between the Department of Justice's approach to antitrust and the realities of the competitive video marketplace.

Related: O'Reilly Says It Is Time to Jettison Myopic Vision of Broadcast Market

For example, when negotiating settlements with TV stations over sharing competitively sensitive ad information, Justice said the relevant competition was other broadcasters, not the wider world of video providers.

That came in his nomination hearing for a new, five-year, hitch on the commission during questioning by Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.).

O'Rielly said he didn't think that either the FCC's rules or the Justice Department's approach reflected what was actually happening in the competitive marketplace.

He pointed out there are a number of video providers--OTT notably--that currently provide service under no regulation other than their "general practices," while legacy services like broadcast and cable are.

He said the dichotomy between the two is "incredibly problematic." He said he thought the FCC had done a good job at trying to rectify that, but said his interpretation has "run into a roadblock" at Justice, which "refuses to change its perspective on broadcasters and who they compete with. 

He said it was very problematic that Justice believes that broadcasters only compete with other broadcasters in a select market at a select time for select advertising.

He said he was hoping to work with Justice on the issue, but said the pandemic intervened.  

Sen. Blunt shared O'Rielly's view and rooted him on in his quest for a larger competitive market view of broadcasting.

"I think on ownership issues, and other issues, not recognizing how big the competitive field is is a big mistake as we move into the future and I hope you can continue to vigorously pursue that discussion. 

Justice has recently signaled it would be open to looking into whether over-the-top should be put in broadcasters' competitive ad market. 

The FCC wants to work with the Department of Energy to address the issue of how new energy efficiency building codes impact wireless propagation in houses and buildings and what the government should do with that information in terms of wireless policy. 

In a letter to Department of Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette, FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly said he had FCC chair Ajit Pai's support for creating an interagency working group between the two agencies focus on the issue and solutions. 

"The explosive growth in wireless communications over the last many years has resulted in increasing interplay involving building codes, construction techniques and materials, and wireless communications coverage," he wrote.  

O'Rielly said DOE's involvement in setting building codes that boost energy and thermal efficiency in buildings and houses has impacted wireless signals near and within those. 

"Specifically," he said, "higher energy efficiency requirements, construction techniques, and the use of certain materials, such as metal-coated windows, double-pane windows, and metal foil barriers, have increased what is known as building entry and exit loss ('BEL'). 

He said the FCC and DOE could look at "the effects of model building codes on BEL; whether the building code-setting process should take into account the potential impact of various energy-saving techniques on BEL; and how this information can better inform architectural and building construction considerations in the future." 

He also points out that given that the signals are weakened by the energy efficient measures, which are increasingly being adopted in building codes, "there is less risk of harmful interference from competing signals from inside and outside modern structures, which means there may be opportunities for more flexibility in certain wireless operations." 

The FCC has voted to allow broadcasters to substitute online disclosures of certain FCC applications--rather than having to make them on-air, in newspapers, or both--but with tweaks to the draft order that should please broadcasters concerned the FCC would clutter up their video apps.

Actually, the FCC voted all four of its agenda items before the May 13 public meeting--scheduled to begin at 10:30 a.m.--a meeting that was not expected to take more than a few minutes.

Currently, some stations, radio and TV, are required to provide written notices to a local newspapers, others to provide on-air notices and some to use both, with specific rules on "timing, frequency, duration, and content."

The FCC said that complexity has created compliance issues it wanted to resolve by streamlining the process, making it uniform, and allowing for online notification on a station's Web site.

According to FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly, changes were made to the draft proposal per his suggested edits--and along the lines requested by broadcasters--so that the online link to the FCC applications doesn't have to be at the top of the home page or on a station's app.

"Having already expressed suspicion on First Amendment grounds of a prescriptive formula specifying how stations must comply with notice rules, I was taken aback by suggestions by certain commenters that the Commission pinpoint exactly where on the web page the disclosures are to be posted," O'Rielly said after the vote. Broadcasters had pointed out that other links, to a stations public file or EEO info and contest disclosure rules, were generally at the bottom of the home page, which might make more sense for the application link as well.

"I thank the chairman for including my proposed edits that provide greater flexibility for digital disclosures, keeping the application notification rules in line with other disclosure obligations," said O'Rielly.

The FCC draft item had originally proposed that any station app had to include the application link, but broadcasters argued that the app mandate was an "unnecessary and burdensome" additional regulation (in an item meant to streamline the process), especially given what they called the "evolving nature" of station apps.

O'Rielly had called that mandate faulty and counterproductive. 

Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly has asked President Trump to lean on the Department of Defense to free up spectrum for 5G.

That came in an April 8 letter to Trump from O'Rielly, who is a fan of the President.

O'Rielly praised the President's "extraordinary leadership" on "all communications policy matters" before getting to the ask, which was his direct intervention to get DOD to "reduce its spectrum footprint in a timely manner to promote 5G services."

But while the President has made winning the race to 5G a priority, he is also historically deferential to the military.

O'Rielly included praise for both Trump and his efforts to boost the military, but said freeing up 5G did not threaten that legacy or the national defense.

Related: CTIA ID's more GI Spectrum for 5G

"Under your direction, the U.S. military has been vastly improved and better funded to ensure it regains its prominence as the finest and strongest force ever seen on the face of the Earth," he said. "At the same time, it is clear that more can be done to improve spectrum efficiency within DoD. Indeed, the reallocation of spectrum from DoD is not mutually exclusive with national security and must be pursued for the betterment of the American people and to ensure the continued success of our military under your leadership."

He said that the only potential source of huge tracts of midband spectrum for commercial 5G wireless were to be found in the hands of Federal departments and agencies and that they had been reluctant to part with it, especially DOD, "the largest holder of the most ideal mid-band spectrum."

He gave the distinct impression DOD could be renamed DOSD, the Department of Spectrum Defense, saying it was "exceptionally reluctant to part with one single megahertz. Simply put, every excuse, delay tactic, and political chit is used to prevent the repurposing of any spectrum."

CTIA-the Wireless Association president Meredith Attwell Baker added her member's support to O'Rielly's effort.

“We share Commissioner O’Rielly’s concerns about the lack of a mid-band spectrum pipeline," she said. "We are long overdue for action on the 3 GHz band and we need the administration to quickly clear a significant portion of that spectrum to help drive our future 5G economy." 

Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly is a big fan of President Trump's executive order (EO) creating a top Administration official committee to review foreign applications for FCC telecom licenses. 

The President released the order over the weekend, essentially adding a new layer of oversight on the government's historic "Team Telecom" national security reviews of foreign ownership applications, but one that puts shot clocks on the process.

Related: FCC Denies China Mobile Interconnect 

“I am exceptionally pleased by President Trump’s release of an Executive Order setting forth official procedures for administrative agencies to review and comment on FCC applications involving foreign ownership of communications companies, previously referred to as ‘Team Telecom,’" O'Rielly wrote in a statement on the order. 

"While all of our hearts and minds are properly focused on the COVID-19 pandemic, this EO will facilitate acceptable investment of foreign capital in the communications sector to help jump start the industry and our economy, when that time comes." 

O'Rielly has long been a critic of the team telecom review process, which he calls unpredictable and indefensible, and which he said reached new heights of dysfunction under President Obama. 

O'Rielly has been particularly critical of the delays in the process. In May 2019 he pointed to one team telecom review that took seven years, a delay he said was not fair to the company and needed to change. He said at that time that such reviews should themselves be reviewed and improved, something the Executive Order pledges to do.  

 According to a spokesperson for O'Rielly, "our expectation would be that formalizing the process should effectively speed things up because there’s a limited timeframe in which to make decisions, and therefore agencies will have to engage in the process more actively to meet the deadlines and won’t have the discretion to sit on an application indefinitely." 

The commissioner called on FCC chairman Ajit Pai to integrate the order into FCC reviews ASAP.  

The chairman said Monday (April 6) that now that the order has been issued, "the FCC will move forward to conclude our own pending rulemaking on reform of the foreign ownership review process." 

The FCC voted Wednesday (April 1) to start spending $200 million on telehealth per the direction of Congress in the CARES Act COVID-19 aid bill, but for at least one of the commissioners it was too quick for the second part of the proposal, a $100 million telehealth pilot project that has been cooking for some time and was also approved as part of the two-item, telehealth, package. 

While it was a bipartisan vote, Republican commissioner Michael O'Rielly dissented strongly from the majority on the pilot project item, using terms like fiscally reckless, obfuscate, and exhibiting a lack of rigor "beneath the Commission's standards." 

O'Rielly had asked that the two program frameworks--the COVID-19 Telehealth Program and Connected Care Program--be separated into two items so he could vote quickly on the first while taking more time to study the second, but said in his lengthy statement that his request did not carry the day for "specious reasons" and that it was being spun as targeting the awful pandemic when the money could not be distributed anytime soon based on the item timelines. 

FCC officials did tell reporters on background this week that the pilot Connected Care Program would be targeted at opioid abuse, mental health and chronic diseases like diabetes, rather than COVID-19. 

But O'Rielly was not done. He said that item was on shaky legal footing and was the equivalent to a government-run beauty contest without any objective criteria. 

He slammed its "neither here nor there" funding source and said it would "blatantly violate the federal anti-kickback statute.  

He said his vote was hurried, with no chance to offer edits or even digest the item, calling it "not a prudent or effective policymaking process."

FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly is raising the issue of whether it is a problem that Nielsen currently has a lock on the data used to determine whether a TV station has significant out-of-market viewing.

If the FCC determines that there is significant out-of-market viewing, cable and satellite MVPDs can import that station into a market, even if it duplicates syndicated and network programming.

The FCC uses Nielsen data both for that viewing and for market definitions. The commission voted unanimously Tuesday (March 31) to look whether the FCC should update its methodology for making those viewing determinations, but O'Rielly also brought up a related issue in his statement on the vote.

"We note in today’s item that Nielsen viewership surveys are the data source underlying much of the Significantly Viewed TV Stations List simply as a matter of practice and, likely, efficiency," he said. "Another Nielsen measurement, the Designated Market Area (DMA), is codified in the statute and must be utilized when developing data related to local markets. In cases where the DMA must be used as a matter of law, it has created challenges for other broadcast data research firms that have no choice but to pay royalties to Nielsen in order to utilize DMAs in their analysis, as the DMA is a proprietary measurement even though it is widely used throughout the industry."

O'Rielly said he was not offering any conclusions one way or the other, but raising the issue suggested it was, well, an issue. He did "encourage further analysis" of whether that is a problem, and what the FCC could do about it. 

The Trump Administration's announcement Wednesday (March 18) that Republican FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly was being renominated for a new five-year term drew applause from various quarters, including close to his FCC home. 

He was hailed as a friend of free markets, unlicensed spectrum, and competition.

“I want to congratulate my friend and colleague, commissioner Mike O’Rielly, on his renomination by the President to serve another term at the FCC," said FCC chair Ajit Pai. "The President has made a wise choice. Commissioner O’Rielly and I have worked side-by-side for over six years—he is not only a colleague, but a good friend. He’s made many contributions to the work of the Commission, from his leadership on 3.5 GHz spectrum policy to his unwavering advocacy against state misuse of 911 funding. And when we were in the minority, he consistently stood on principle while being pragmatic. I look forward to continuing to work with commissioner O’Rielly to advance the public interest and hope the Senate will act quickly to confirm his nomination.” 

“I want to extend my congratulations to Mike on his renomination by the White House," said fellow Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr. "Mike’s tireless work ethic has helped deliver many good wins for this country during his time on the Commission. I very much look forward to continuing to partner with him, and I am excited about the great work he will continue to do at the FCC.”

Related: Trump Nominates O'Rielly to New Term 

“CTIA and the wireless industry congratulate Michael O’Rielly on his re-nomination as an FCC commissioner," said CTIA president Meredith Attwell Baker, herself a former Republican FCC commissioner. "Commissioner O’Rielly has been a champion for smart spectrum policies, ending 9-1-1 fee diversion and countless other important wireless and broadband issues. His dedication to understanding the details of issues, commitment to the value of competition, and strong sense of regulatory humility have benefited wireless consumers in the U.S. and across the globe. We look forward to his continued leadership and to his re-confirmation by the Senate.” 

"We congratulate Mike O’Rielly for his well-deserved renomination to the Federal Communications Commission," said NCTA-The Internet & Television Association president, and former FCC chairman, Michael Powell. "During his tenure at the FCC, commissioner O’Rielly has successfully advocated for forward-looking policies that promote marketplace competition, remove unnecessary regulation and incent companies to expand services to ensure that every American can benefit from today’s digital economy. Mike deserves enormous credit for his leadership to urge the Commission to free up unlicensed spectrum to supercharge our WiFi networks and unleash new technologies that can connect more consumers to the internet. We urge the Senate to quickly confirm commissioner O’Rielly to a second term.” 

“Charter congratulates commissioner Michael O’Rielly on his re-nomination to the Federal Communications Commission," the company said in a statement. "Commissioner O’Rielly understands the important role that connectivity plays in the lives of all Americans and has worked to promote a regulatory environment that fosters the expansion of broadband networks. Throughout his years at the FCC, commissioner O’Rielly has been a strong advocate for a balanced approach to U.S. spectrum policy that recognizes the need for licensed and unlicensed spectrum, which is evident in his work to establish rules for the upcoming CBRS auction and his support for opening the 5.9 and 6 GHz bands for unlicensed use. We look forward to continuing to work with commissioner O’Rielly in the years to come.” 

“Michael O’Rielly has been an outstanding FCC commissioner and NATE looks forward to continue collaborating with him on important policy issues ranging from workforce development, promoting deregulation to streamline infrastructure deployments, expanding broadband to rural and underserved regions of the country, public safety communications and increasing the industry’s access to valuable spectrum,” said Todd Schlekeway, president of NATE: The Communications Infrastructure Contractors Association. "Having continuity on the Commission at this time is great news for our dynamic industry and NATE encourages the U.S. Senate to act quickly to confirm O’Rielly’s renomination."

“FCC commissioner Mike O’Rielly has the experience, substance and heart to help lead our nation into a better broadband future," said Chip Pickering, CEO of INCOMPAS. "We wish to congratulate him and his family on the great honor of being nominated to a second term at the FCC. Commissioner O’Rielly has been a friend of free markets, a watchdog against fraud and abuse, and a vocal advocate for eliminating local barricades that block competition and delay new network builders. We look forward to continuing to work with him.” 

"Commissioner O’Rielly has been a staunch ally in opening up the spectrum to more unlicensed use, right-sized regulatory approaches for small companies, and bridging the digital divide by, among other things, ensuring that government subsidies connect Americans who truly lack broadband access first," said WISPA president Claude Aiken. "He is a tireless champion for getting all Americans online no matter where they live, and we greatly value his partnership, especially at it relates to helping more rural Americans obtain access to high-speed broadband."

“Comcast commends Michael O’Rielly on being nominated to serve another term as a Commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission," said Sena Fitzmaurice, SVP, government communications. "He has been tireless in promoting policies that spur investment and job creation in the communications industries, and he is a leader on promoting a balanced spectrum policy for licensed and unlicensed uses and a champion for modernizing media regulations. We applaud this well-deserved nomination and look forward to continuing to work with Commissioner O’Rielly on the Commission.”

President Donald Trump has nominated FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly for a new, five-year term. 

O'Rielly's term expired at the end of June 2019, but commissioners can continue to serve until the close of the next Congress. 

The new term would start July 1, 2019.  

Related: O'Rielly Warns Broadcasters Not to Abuse KidVid Flexibility

“NAB strongly supports the renomination of Mike O’Rielly to the FCC," said National Association of Broadcasters president Gordon Smith. "Without question, commissioner O’Rielly has served in this position with class, integrity and distinction. On a personal note, I’ve known Mike since his days as a Capitol Hill staffer, and I am so pleased with this reappointment. I urge my former colleagues in the Senate to swiftly confirm him.” 

O'Rielly is a deregulatory conservative who favors lifting media ownership rules given the rise of competition from cable and broadband and satellite, and was instrumental in loosening KidVid regs on TV stations. 

"I am deeply appreciative of the President’s decision and his aggressive leadership on communications policy, including extensive efforts to bring broadband access to all Americans," said O'Rielly. 

“During my tenure at the Commission, I have advocated for preserving and advancing American free market principles to develop common sense regulation and eliminate unnecessary rules that hurt consumers. I hope to continue this work should the Senate decide to approve my nomination. 

“As we face the monumental challenges currently confronting our nation, it is gratifying to watch the private and public sectors pulling together to rise to the occasion. Our work at the Commission persists, meeting the needs of the millions of American businesses, workers, families, and students facing unique communications needs and issues." 

Democratic FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel and Republican Michael O'Rielly are in agreement that the FCC needs to free up the 6 GHz spectrum band for unlicensed WiFi and 5G ASAP, but that with the current coronavirus crisis, that may not happen as soon as they would have liked. 

They also are in agreement that a new wireless industry push to auction a portion of that 6 GHz spectrum for licensed use is not the way to go. 

That came in a conversation with Michael Calabrese of New America's Open Technology Institute for a "Next Generation Wi-Fi: Heading Off a 5G Digital Divide with Affordable Connectivity for All" event that had to move online. There were occasional buffering issues during the streamed event (see photo), and the low-angle laptop views that are not the most flattering of headshots. But those only served as a reminder of a world where a real, rather than online, virus is requiring major changes in how we communicate.  It did provide the event with a more intimate feel.

Priscilla Delgado Argeris from Facebook teed up the discussion by talking about how important it was to free up the 6 GHz spectrum, and as much as possible, for unlicensed wireless, which translates to the wireless broadband that is becoming a primary vehicle for internet access. 

The FCC is currently working on such an item.  

When it was their turn to weigh in, O'Rielly and Rosenworcel were clearly on the same page as to the importance of the spectrum being freed up for unlicensed, rather than licensed. 

Asked by Calabrese if they supported the CTIA proposal to move incumbents in the upper part of the 6 GHz band to the 7 GHz band and auctioning that upper portion for licensed use, the commissioners generally agreed with cable operators that that process would take too much time to be feasible. 

Related: Conservatives Push for All 6 GHz to Be Freed Up For Unlicensed 

O'Rielly said he would keep an open mind on the issue--the item has not been voted so he is expected not to pass any pre-judgments--and that he was mindful that wireless companies needed more license spectrum. But he also said that he did not believe CTIA's suggestion of moving 6 GHz incumbents, like utility companies, into the 7 GHz band, with its incumbent DOD users, was a viable option because he wasn't sure DOD would accept the new neighbors, and he had talked to utility companies who were more interested in making sharing with unlicensed users work. 

O'Rielly said he would continue to listen to dialogue, and if something changes he would reconsider. 

Rosenworcel agreed with her colleague. She signaled that if getting the spectrum to market quickly was important--which she has said it clearly is--10 years was too long. 

The event was marked by unusual comedy between the commissioners who are often at odds over FCC policy, though unlicensed spectrum has been a unifying issue for them.  

Rosenworcel thanks O'Rielly for his hard work, while O'Rielly returned the praise and even added efforts by former FCC chairman Tom Wheeler. 

Calabrese asked Rosenworcel whether she thought the wireless industry would have been in better shape to handle the coronavirus distance-learning workload had the 6 GHz band already been freed up, she said absolutely. She also said that when the crisis has passed, the FCC should measure where broadband networks succeeded, and where they failed to do some of its own distance learning, which she said would probably include that the country needs more WiFi and the 6 GHz band is a good place to look. 

Related: Broadcast, Cable Square Off Over 6 GHz

O'Rielly agreed there would be both positive and negative lessons learned, and the FCC would learn a lot and had a lot to do. 

Calabrese pointed out that some folks have argued that with all the 6 GHz spectrum the FCC is planning to free up, it doesn't necessarily need the "marginal" 45 MHz in the 5.9 band it wants to reallocate from licenses connected car (V2V) uses (it is leaving 30 MHz clear for V2V). 

O'Rielly immediately pushed back. He said that the 5.9 GHz spectrum is incredibly important, and that the car companies who continue to push for all 75 MHz are using problematic hyperbole to make their case. He said that the 5.9 spectrum could be repurposed almost immediately, while it would take more time for 6 GHz. He said he thought the auto industry was missing that. 

Rosenworcel pointed to the "macro" issue of incumbent licensed spectrum users resisting effort to free up spectrum for unlicensed. That included government users who push back on any clearing or sharing of spectrum below 8 GHz, even as Congress has charged the FCC with finding more unlicensed spectrum. She suggested that spectrum NMBY problem was "as old as time," but needed fixing. That is because such recalcitrance can slow down innovation and, ultimately, the economy," she said, not having to expound on the inadvisability of doing anything more to slow the economy at the present time.

The issue was bigger than 5.9 GHz, she said, and needs to be addressed "at a higher level." 

The Free State Foundation said all systems are go for its policy conference March 10 in Washington. 

Free State released the final agenda for the conference, which includes an A-list of policymakers. 

Related: ACA Connects Postpones D.C. Conference 

Among those scheduled to participate are FCC chair Ajit Pai and commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Brendan Carr. 

The FCC has suspended non-essential travel and appearances at "large gatherings" due to concerns over the coronavirus, but the FSF conference is more of a boutique event and in the FCC's back yard. 

Related: CPAC Attendee Tests Positive for Coronavirus

FSF president Randolph May confirmed that he had checked with the relevant FCC offices and the speakers were a "go" as well. 

Republican FCC commissioners Brendan Carr and Michael O'Rielly echoed shared about Big Tech and Silicon Valley at the America Conservative Union's Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) conference outside Washington Saturday (Feb. 29). 

Addressing allegations of conservative bias on online platforms, Carr said he did not think the answer was "to do nothing." He cited what he said was a leaked document from Twitter "that it would soon be able to allow political ideologues to stamp tweets as misinformation based on their perspective," saying: "I don't think that's the right thing." 

"If you don't want MSNBC fact-checking the information you see on Twitter," he said, "I think you should be empowered to make that decision and turn those types of bias filters off. That comment drew applause from moderator Gordon Chang and the audience. 

Asked to weigh in on the charge that Google is helping China spy on its own people, Carr conceded there was little the FCC could do from a jurisdiction standpoint, but he weighed in regardless. "I'll say this. The hypocrisy here is stunning. Those in Silicon Valley have no problem telling the rest of the country what we should think; what we should believe; what our values are. The second it comes to getting into a country with nearly two billion people, all of a sudden those values they preach to us kind of go by the wayside." 

Carr is hardly alone in that assessment. Silicon Valley has drawn criticism from both sides of the political spectrum. 

But Carr conceded it was a tough decision for a company like Google to make, whether to bring those countries a taste of freedom, or stay out. 

O'Rielly said he was sympathetic to the arguments that have been made "in terms of the harms high-tech companies present in terms of their censoring of American conservatives, the work they are trying to do internationally in the most harmful countries in the world and how that has built up those networks to cause harm to people throughout the world. So we are mindful of that. We use our voice to help amplify the need to address those matters but there is only so much we can do directly. 

On the issue 5G supremacy, Carr gave President Trump credit for "flipping the script" when, under the previous Democratic Administration, Carr said the U.S. was under serious risk of ceding leadership in 5G to China and others. 

Carr said the new script is that the FCC has the strongest 5G network. 

Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China," came out firing at Chinese telecom Huawei, which he said is wiring up most of the world. He even led the audience in a brief chant: "Stop Huawei, Stop China," a chant that Carr and O'Rielly did not join, but stood and applauded as the session ended.  

The FCC recently excluded Huawei tech from broadband subsidy money and the Trump Administration has signaled it is an untrustworthy supplier and national security threat, though it also sent the signal that that status could be a chip in trade talks. 

Carr suggested the President had sent a "clear message" that "we are going to do whatever it takes to secure our nation's networks from that threat." 

Carr said that the FCC was doing its part by prohibiting subsidized Huawei gear from U.S. networks and looking to rip and replace it in existing networks. He also cited cracking down on IP theft, including by Huawei, in trade talks, again giving the President credit. 

Carr said the U.S. Can't treat Huawei as "anything other than a threat to our collective security." He said that China and Huawei, which "does their bidding," has a list of malign conduct--bribery, corruption--"longer than a CVS receipt,"  

Chang asked how moving to virtualized networks--software rather than hardware-centric--could help secure U.S. networks and decrease reliance on foreign companies like Huawei, Nokia and Ericksson--the Big Three in 5G tech. 

O'Rielly said moving to cloud-based networks would be a U.S. sweetspot. "In a virtualized world we are talking about moving most of the software to the cloud where the U.S. companies are dominating and will continue to dominate for decades to come." 

He said that will allow the country to move away from the end-to-end architecture Huawei has been pushing. O'Rielly said that move was not something the government was not having to force on companies because they were moving to virtualized networks on their own. "It is in their best interests to gain the efficiencies of the cloud. So it is not about forcing anyone, he said, but instead about market forces meeting the demand for networks that are better protected from the "harmful things" the Chinese network is trying to do. 

Carr seconded that, agreeing that it was a triumph of the free market.  

Republican FCC Commissioners Michael O'Rielly and Brendan Carr will be interviewed this weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC2020) at the National Harbor, Md., Gaylord National Resort and Conference Center.

The "conversation" with the commissioners will be Saturday (Feb. 29) at 1:40 p.m. moderated by Gordon Chang, author of "The Coming Collapse of China."

One big issue both commissioners have been dealing with is the threat of Chinese telecoms to 5G network security. Chang is no fan of Huawei, one of the telecoms the FCC is scrubbing from government-funded broadband buildouts.

[embed]https://twitter.com/GordonGChang/status/1186653020978909184[/embed]

The conversation will be over by 3 p.m., when another D.C. Republican is scheduled to take the CPAC center-stage: President Trump.

This will not be the first CPAC rodeo for either Carr or O'Rielly. In fact, O'Rielly's 2018 conversation caused quite a stir.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel concluded that O'Rielly violated the Hatch Act prohibitions on certain political activities by federal branch employees by calling for the re-election of President Trump at the conference. The office issued a warning to O'Rielly that there would be consequences for a future violation. O'Rielly said he still believed he did not violate any rules, but also said he took the warning seriously.

At the time, the FCC's Office of General Counsel concluded that there was nothing ethically wrong with the appearance of the commissioners at CPAC, a separate issue from what they said while appearing.

House Dems at the time were not pleased with the appearance of any of the FCC commissioners.

FCC Chairman Pai has appeared at the conference in the past, including to pick up an award from the conservative group, but he was not listed on this year's agenda and a spokesperson for the chairman confirmed he would not be attending.

Democratic FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said the 5G hype machine is in full force, though there is agreement that next-gen wireless will indeed be the network of the future.  

Related: Future Tech Funding Bill Introduced

That came in the Senate Commerce Committee's first hearing of the new year, entitled "Industries of the Future" and dealing with the federal government's role in advancing new technologies. 

Also testifying was Republican commissioner Michael O'Rielly, who joined with Rosenworcel in saying it was important on freeing up C-Band (midband) spectrum for 5G ASAP. But O'Rielly said the priority was speed, while Rosenworcel said it should be "getting it right." O'Rielly has argued that getting it fast and getting it right are not mutually exclusive. 

On the issue of speeding the 5G rollout, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Ohio), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, pointed out that there is "a company on TV" already advertising that they are already leading the industry in 5G. 

Rosenworcel said there have been some deployments, which was exciting, but that they were chiefly in urban areas. But she said that, overall, there were more deployments in countries like Switzerland, and far more in China. 

She said most of the world had seen U.S. leadership in 4G and decided they wanted to do that this time around.  

Related: Senate Commerce Approves C-Band Auction Bill

Rosenworcel carried her criticism of what she said was the FCC's focus on high-band spectrum to the witness table. She said the U.S. was alone in focusing on auctioning high-band early on, which she said was only good for urban America, not rural. She said the FCC needs to pivot to midband. 

Wicker asked if the FCC commissioners agreed on the need for that pivot. She said the committee could help get it there by coming up with legislation to chart out the best way forward on 5G spectrum. 

Wicker said the committee would certainly want to be heard from on where the money from those spectrum auctions go. But he asked FCC O'Rielly, who was also a witness at the hearing, for advice on the quickest way to get spectrum for 5G. 

O'Rielly said he was definitely on the same page with Rosenworcel when it came to wanting 5G spectrum freed up quickly, and associated himself with her remarks on some of the advancements in other countries. But he did not say that meant the U.S. is behind. He called it an active race whose winner is yet to be determined.  

In terms of, say, the C-Band auction, which is the spectrum Rosenworcel would like to see the FCC prioritize clearing, O'Rielly said he was willing to trade "some of the ideals that people would have liked otherwise" in order to speed its clearing. 

He said that was why he felt the satellite providers giving up the spectrum must be compensated to avoid protracted litigation. "Trying to take that from them would be an aggressive action by the commission." 

Rosenworcel said legislation was needed to clarify the FCC's practice of reclaiming spectrum and to direct where the billions of dollars in proceeds should be directed.  Satellite companies have argued the FCC does not have the authority to simply take the spectrum without compensating them for it.

But some in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are concerned that paying satellite operator incumbents, all international companies, would be taking money that could instead be spent on things like public safety and rural broadband.  

Wicker said Congress had noted it could be a great deal of money, but asked about the litigation risk O'Rielly was talking about. 

Rosenworcel said legislation could help prevent litigation. O'Rielly said he welcomed litigation, but absent that he said the FCC needs to address the issue and act.  

Wicker asked whether there would have to be legislation early this year, O'Rielly said absolutely. 

Ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said she did not want the to turn into a proxy discussion about how much to pay foreign satellite companies for the spectrum. Chiefly because she said the law is clear that they don't own the spectrum.  

And while Wicker appeared to align himself with O'Rielly's need for speed, Cantwell said: "I'm with you Ms. Rosenworcel, let's get it right." 

Eight new Touchstones of Leadership Award winners will be saluted at the Women In Cable Telecommunications (WICT) Washington/Baltimore Chapter's PowerBrokers Breakfast Oct. 4 at the National Press Club in Washington. They include a current FCC commissioner saluted for his public service. 

The awards honor leaders who have had local, regional and national impacts on the industry. ABC News Live anchor/correspondent Kimberly Brooks will keynote the event. 

And the 2019 Leadership Awards winners are:  

Geraldine B. Laybourne Award: Michelle Rice, GM, TV One and Cleo TV 

Inspire Award: Jana D. Fay, VP of finance, C-SPAN 

Communicate Award: Janet Uthman, VP, inclusion and multicultural marketing. Comcast Northeast Division 

Connect Award: Brad Surdam, VP, engineering, Comcast's Beltway Region

Know Yourself Award: Michelle A. Ray, executive director, The Walter Kaitz Foundation 

Catalyst Award: Lesli Rotenberg, chief programming executive and GM, children's media and education, PBS 

Listen Award: Vonya Alleyne, VP, human resources, Cox Communications, Virginia 

Glenn Britt Emerging Leader Award: Karen Greenfield, SVP, business and production operations, NatGeo Wild 

Outstanding Public Service Award: FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly.

The head of the Universal Service Administrative Co., which administers broadband subsidies under the Universal Service Fund, said that E-Rate fund recipients can indeed overbuild existing fiber plant if it is the most cost-effective use of the subsidy to get advanced communications so schools and libraries.

That came in a letter to FCC commissioner Michael O'Rielly from USAC CEO Radha Sekar in response to an inquiry from O'Rielly.

O'Rielly last month had written Sekar seeking some answers on whether government broadband subsidies should be used to subsidize wide area networks (WANS) where government subsidies have already been used to lay fiber as well as how many of those were being subsidized. Sekar did not have an answer for the latter, saying USAC did not track whether the money was going to WANS or whether the money for WANS or other special projects was overbuilding.

"USAC does not have sufficient data to determine if approved special construction funding partially or fully overbuilds existing fiber networks," Sekar said.

But as to whether "the E-rate rules permit funding for special construction projects, whether self-provisioned networks or networks owned by a commercial provider, that would duplicate, in whole or in part, fiber networks that have been built using federal funds?" The answer was yes.

"If the cost of applicant ownership over the life of the network is less expensive than the cost of using an existing network, the applicant can be approved for fiber construction funding of their own network," the USAC CEO said.

And if a consortium builds a WAN, O'Rielly asked--there have been 43 consortia seeking funding since 2014, says USAC--can it get money for a WAN even if individual consortium members can get service from an existing provider, Sekar said yes, again so long as the WAN as that is the most cost-effective option.

USAC could not tell O'Rielly how much money had been given out for WANS--since USAC does not track that--but it did have a figure for special projects, of which WANS are a subset*: $202,399,488.79.

“USAC’s purported inability to identify and prevent the overbuilding problem previously described exposes the inadequacy of the Commission’s current E-Rate rules, as well as the dire need for better coordination among the USF programs," said a spokesperson for O'Rielly. "Given the low threshold for satisfying the so-called “cost-effectiveness” standard, it’s unsurprising that certain special construction applicants were able to game the rules and configure their applications to achieve a specific outcome. This is unacceptable and needs to change: funding overbuilding in areas served by an existing fiber-based provider—when millions of Americans don’t have any broadband service at all—is a waste of ratepayer money and the epitome of bad government.”

In a speech this week to NTCA – The Rural Broadband Association’s legislative and policy conference in D.C. O'Rielly said he would continue to fight the use of government broadband subsidy money to overbuild existing broadband service deployed with private capital, including from high-profile funds with laudable goals, like E-Rate.

He suggested that some were trying to hijack the E-rate and Rural Health Care Universal Service Fund (USF) programs to "cannibalize your service areas, steal the biggest and most lucrative clients around, and jeopardize your ability to serve remaining consumers." O'Rielly favors capping the USF fund. 

*The balance of "special projects" are last-mile buildouts from existing providers' networks.  

Republican FCC Commissioner Michael O'Rielly is spearheading an effort to put the Universal Service Fund broadband subsidies on a budget, which means capping spending $11.42 billion, which he points out is "well-above current disbursement levels," and leaves a nearly $2 billion cushion for potential spending.

An item was circulated to that effect last week, setting off a storm of protest from some quarters

In a blog about the effort, O'Rielly said it was a much needed and overdue move, and dismissed its critics as "special interest groups and uninformed detractors reflexively opposed to any restraint on the agency’s redistributive subsidies."

He called it an effort to "inject fiscal responsibility" into the USF.

Related: FCC's Pai Pans USF Cuts to Small Carriers

"I believe we must set an upper limit of what we’re willing to take from hardworking American consumers to support these subsidies," said O'Rielly. "Determining this maximum level is also a necessary precondition to any effort to reform the FCC’s method for assessing USF contributions."

Related: O'Reilly Grills USAC on WAN Overbuilds

Critics of a cap on the fund abound.

“Latino communities need the FCC to find ways to make good on its promise to bridge the digital divide instead of perfecting ways to undermine programs working towards that goal," said Francella Ochillo, VP of policy and general counsel at the National Hispanic Media Coalition. "Arbitrary budget cuts to Universal Service Funds will disconnect Americans who are starving for digital opportunities, especially in unserved and underserved communities that Latinos call home.”

“This proposal may impede the FCC from making broadband affordable and accessible for all Americans, and those impacts will be felt most directly by our country’s most vulnerable communities, jeopardizing families who most need assistance connecting, students and low-income individuals who rely on internet access at schools and libraries, and families living in the most rural parts of the U.S.," said Public Knowledge Communications Justice Fellow Alisa Valentin.

"The SHLB Coalition completely agrees with the importance of fiscal responsibility, but imposing an arbitrary cap on the USF expenditures is an awkward approach that could undermine the FCC's stated 'top priority' of closing the digital divide," said John Windhausen, Jr., executive director of the Schools, Health and Libraries Broadband Coalition.

O'Rielly is having none of it.

"Based on some of the more hysterical accounts, a cap would only serve to undermine digital access and hurt the disadvantaged," said O'Rielly. "This couldn’t be further from the truth."

He said it is the lack of a governor on the fund that hurts the disadvantaged because the fund comes from fees on broadband user's bills, so raising what is in effect a tax on broadband access makes it harder for lower income households to connect. 

WASHINGTON — Cable operators got an encouraging word from Federal Communications Commission member Michael O'Rielly for their proposition that they are a potential prime mover in the smart cities of today and tomorrow, but the agency also had a warning about what cities might do with all the data that underlies the "smart cities" concept.

So-called smart cities are using info from sensors and devices to boost public safety, health care, mobility, productivity and overall quality of life.

O'Rielly's shout out and warning came in a speech to Charter Communications' Partnering with Communities Today to Build the Smart Cities of Tomorrow event in Washington Tuesday (Oct. 30).

O'Rielly said fiber would be the key to smart cities, and cited a report released last week by NCTA–The Internet & Television Association, calling it "a compelling argument that cable operators are in a prime position to provide [those fiber] resources and be a lead participant in Smart Cities."

Related: NCTA Says Cable Ops Are Smart 'Smart Cities' Choice

He said the market is taking notice of cable as a player and "acting accordingly, as fiber networks are receiving increased attention and interest from Wall Street to communications company boardrooms, with cable enterprise plays becoming more of a focus in that analysis."

The commissioner cited the FCC's vote to open up the 6-GHz band to unlicensed as one of the things that will help meet the spectrum demands for smart cities.

And while O'Rielly was high on the potential of smart cities, he also raised a caution flag over data collection. He signaled he was more concerned about a governmental Big Brother getting its hands on reams of data as opposed to businesses.

"It always surprises me when privacy advocates, either domestically or internationally, are willing to take to the streets over a company seeking to use consumer-driven data for commercial purposes," he said. "The real worry for privacy advocates and the public should be the combination of data with police and military powers, and the state's potential to use data for the purpose of controlling or punishing its citizenry. How governments can create a comfort level with the potential privacy implications of smart cities remains to be seen, and represents an increasingly heavy lift."

The FCC has yet to release the hearing designation order (HDO), but it is looking more like Sinclair's proposed Tribune deal is headed for an administrative law judge hearing despite the broadcasters' efforts to fix the deal and head off that potentially lengthy process.

The draft order has been changed since it was first circulated earlier this week, but primarily to try to speed the hearing process so it does not become a de facto deal-killer in response to concerns from commissioner Michael O'Rielly, though it appears that may simply be to help the next deal rather than this one.

A source who has seen the final order said that there were "questions of fact on how Sinclair presented information to the commission that have to be resolved through a hearing of some sort, and [FCC chair Ajit Pai] has elected to use the administrative law judge."

Sinclair has strongly denied it did anything wrong and said it made it clear to the FCC who was buying the stations and the sidecar agreements that would be included.

When Pai first circulated the order July 16, he said: “Based on a thorough review of the record, I have serious concerns about the Sinclair-Tribune transaction. The evidence we’ve received suggests that certain station divestitures that have been proposed to the FCC would allow Sinclair to control those stations in practice, even if not in name, in violation of the law."

On Wednesday (July 18), Sinclair withdrew sales of three stations that appeared to create issues with the FCC. The company said it would sell two of the stations to buyers the FCC liked and keep the third, saying that should resolve the issue.

But the FCC source said the takeaway is no quick fix or resolution is likely.

As to why O'Rielly joined in the vote, an aide to the commissioner said: "He recognizes that, based on the material made available to us, there are questions of fact that need to be resolved and, begrudgingly, what's left right now is for us to send it to an ALJ. Unfortunately, that process is so horrendous that we're not naive in believing we are going to get to resolve these questions of fact."

Sinclair and Tribune have an Aug. 8 breakup date for the deal, so that will need to be pushed back if they continue to pursue it. A court decision on the UHF discount that allowed for the deal could also come out any day; it could potentially unwind the deal as well.

"Commissioner O'Rielly has a long history of criticizing the administrative law judge process," the aide said of the changes to the order. "We shouldn't have a process where if we refer something for a hearing it means a death knell for the hearing. We did what we could to enhance the structure of the ALJ process." 

When asked if that meant it could drag on for a couple of years, the aide said, "It probably could."

The aide said O'Rielly's office hoped it would at least serve as precedent for future hearing draft orders.

At a D.C. event Wednesday, commissioner Brendan Carr also said he fully agreed with designating the deal for a hearing, according to a source at the event. Pai and Democratic commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel had already voted it.

Leading House Energy & Commerce Committee Democrats have called on the Office of Special Counsel to investigate all three Republican FCC commissioners (including chair Ajit Pai) for their participation in the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year.

Special Counsel Henry Kerner already concluded that Republican Commissioner Michael O'Rielly violated the Hatch Act  prohibitions on certain political activities by federal branch employees by calling for the re-election of President Trump at the conference. Kerner issued a warning to O'Rielly that there would be consequences for a future violation. O'Rielly said he still believes he did not violate any rules, but also said he took the warning seriously.

But Reps. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), in a letter dated Monday (May 7) have asked the special counsel to look into what they say was all three Republican Commissioners'  refusal (Pai and Brendan Carr round out the trio) to cooperate with congressional oversight of their participation in the conference.

Pallone is ranking member of the Committee, while Doyle is ranking member of the Communications Subcommittee.

In response to Democratic concerns over the CPAC appearances, the FCC's general counsel, Tom Johnson, did respond to them, saying he thought the appearances were not Hatch Act violations--obviously the special counsel disagreed in the case of O'Rielly.

Related: FCC Says CPAC Appearances Were OK

"[T]heir participation was consistent with a long tradition of Commissioners contributing to robust debate on issues of importance to the agency and the nation," Johnson wrote to the Dems two weeks ago. "The Commissioners' ability to accept prominent speaking engagements like this one helps promote transparency and accountability and encourages public participation and interest in Commission rulemakings, without contravening applicable ethics obligations," he added.

Pallone and Doyle cited that response, but said it was "both non-responsive and appeared to misunderstand the Hatch Act.

“A recent letter from the FCC’s General Counsel demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the application of the Act, which may help explain a recent increase in political activity among the Republican FCC Commissioners,” the Democratic legislators wrote. “We therefore additionally request that your office consider conducting training sessions at the FCC to help employees better understand how to comply with the Hatch Act.”

They said they had at least three bones to pick with the general counsel's response:

1. "It was legally misleading because the General Counsel selectively quoted sections of the Special Counsel’s Hatch Act guidance, leaving out sections directly relevant to the Commissioners’ actions.
2. It was factually misleading in its failure to mention that Commissioner O’Rielly made prohibited partisan political remarks.
3. The letter was incomplete because it failed to address a number of the questions from Pallone and Doyle, and provided no documentary evidence supporting its assertions."

“The FCC’s career ethics officials determined that it was permissible for the three Republican Commissioners to speak at CPAC," said an FCC spokesperson. "Indeed, Cabinet members also spoke at CPAC, and the Democrats’ letter contains no explanation for why the Commissioners’ participation should be treated any differently.  Sadly, we are left to conclude that the Democrats are simply trying to stop FCC Commissioners from speaking to right-of-center organizations while they have no problem with Commissioners speaking to left-of-center groups.”